Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Pain Research and Management
Volume 2017, Article ID 2435263, 5 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/2435263
Research Article

Single-Needle Arthrocentesis with Upper Compartment Distension versus Conventional Two-Needle Arthrocentesis: Randomized Clinical Trial

1Craniofacial Pain Applied to Dentistry, Dentistry Faculty, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Ramiro Barcelos Street 2492, 90035-004 Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
2Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Ramiro Barcelos Street 2492, 90035-004 Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
3Department of Dentistry, State University of Maringá, Mandacaru Avenue 1550, 87080-000 Maringá, PR, Brazil
4Dental Radiology and Stomatology, Department of Dentistry, State University of Maringá, Mandacaru Avenue 1550, 87080-000 Maringá, PR, Brazil
5Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Department of Dentistry, State University of Maringá, Mandacaru Avenue 1550, 87080-000 Maringá, PR, Brazil
6Private Clinic, Freitas and Castro Street 481, 90040-401 Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil

Correspondence should be addressed to Eduardo Grossmann; moc.liamg@rodgude

Received 9 May 2017; Revised 27 July 2017; Accepted 24 August 2017; Published 3 October 2017

Academic Editor: Filippo Brighina

Copyright © 2017 Eduardo Grossmann et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

The objective of this study was to compare single-needle arthrocentesis with distension of the upper compartment of the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) with the conventional two-needle arthrocentesis. Twenty-six patients with articular disc displacement without reduction (DDWOR) were included in the study and assigned to two groups (): single-needle arthrocentesis with distension of the upper compartment of the TMJ (1N) and conventional two-needle arthrocentesis (2N). The maximum interincisal distance (MID) and TMJ pain as measured by the visual analog scale (VAS) were compared. MID and VAS data were obtained: before (T1), seven days after (T2), fifteen days after (T3), one month after (T4), three months after (T5), six months after (T6), nine months after (T7), and one year after the arthrocentesis procedures (T8). Considering each group individually, results of the VAS scores and MID measurements showed a significant difference between T1 and T2–T8 () in both groups. Between two groups, results show no significant differences (). Both techniques tested were effective in reducing pain and increasing MID. Due to the advantages over the conventional two-needle arthrocentesis, single-needle arthrocentesis with distension of the upper compartment should be considered as the first treatment option for patients with painful hypomobilized TMJ of DDWOR.