Comparison of the Efficacy of Botulinum Toxin, Local Anesthesia, and Platelet-Rich Plasma Injections in Patients With Myofascial Trigger Points in the Masseter Muscle.

PURPOSE: Masticatory myofascial trigger points (TrP) are one of the major causes of nondental pain in the orofacial region. Intramuscular injections are considered the first-line treatment for myofascial TrPs. The objectives of this study were to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of local anesthesia (LA), botulinum toxin (BTX), and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections for the treatment of myofascial TrPs in the masseter muscle. METHODS: In this retrospective study, the sample was composed of patients with myofascial TrPs in masseter muscle who were treated between 2016 and 2019. Patients were divided into 3 groups according to treatment methods: group I (LA injection), group II (BTX injection), and group III (PRP injection). Primary outcome variable was the average pain level at rest and while chewing, and pressure pain intensity (PPI), Jaw Functional Limitation Scale (JFLS) value, and quality-of-life (measured using Oral Health Impact Profile-14 (OHIP-14)) were secondary outcomes. The outcome variables were assessed at diagnosis, and 1, 3, and 6 months post-treatment. RESULTS: The study consisted of 82 patients (group I, 27; group II, 26; group III, 29). At 1 and 3 months, improvement in all parameters was recorded in all groups. Groups I and II showed superior improvement in all parameters compared with group III at 3 months. Improvements in VAS pain, JFLS, and OHIP-14 values were significantly better in group II than group I at 3 months (P = .009; P = .004; P = .002). At 6 months, significant improvement in VAS pain, JFLS, and OHIP-14 (P = .008; P < .001; P < .01) values was recorded only in group II. CONCLUSIONS: All procedures successfully improved the symptoms of TrPs in the masseter muscle at 1 and 3 months. However, BTX injection seemed superior at the 3-month follow-up and remained effective up to 6 months.

Evaluation of effectiveness of concentrated growth factor on osseointegration.

BACKGROUND: Growth factor-containing products have been reported to increase implant stability and accelerate osseointegration. Concentrated growth factor (CGF) can be used for this purpose with the growth factors it contains. The aim of this study is to assess the effect of CGF on implant stability and osseointegration. METHODS: Twelve patients with maxillary anterior toothless were included in the study. Implant cavities prepared in the study group were covered with CGF membrane before implant placement, but conventional implant placement was performed in the control group. Resonance frequency measurements were performed with the Osstell device intra-operatively, post-operatively, at the 1st week, and at the 4th week. RESULTS: The mean ISQ values were found to be 79.40 ± 2.604 for the study group and 73.50 ± 5.226 for the control group at 1st week, 78.60 ± 3.136 for the study group and 73.45 ± 5.680 for the control group at 4th week. The differences between the groups were statistically significant (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: It was observed that the concentrated growth factor had positive effects on implant stabilization. The ISQ measurements at week 1 and week 4 were notably higher in the study group. Application of this material seems to accelerate osseointegration.

Long-Term Outcome of Arthrocentesis Plus Hyaluronic Acid Injection in Patients With Wilkes Stage II and III Temporomandibular Joint Internal Derangement.

OBJECTIVE: Arthrocentesis is a minimally invasive procedure used to manage temporomandibular joint (TMJ) internal derangement (ID). This study evaluated the outcome of arthrocentesis in patients with Wilkes stage II and III TMJ ID. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective study enrolled 50 patients who underwent arthrocentesis in 2011 and 2012 at the Karadeniz Technical University, Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Turkey. In total, 43 patients underwent unilateral arthrocentesis, whereas 7 patients had bilateral arthrocentesis. The clinical parameters recorded were pain (visual analogue scale [VAS] 0-100 mm during movement), chewing function efficacy (VAS 0-100), clicking sounds, and mandibular movements, including maximum interincisal opening (MIO), lateral excursion, and protrusion. All the parameters were recorded preoperatively, and 1, 3, 6, and 24 months after treatment. RESULTS: The MIO, lateral excursion, and protrusion were significantly greater than preoperatively in all the patients. Pain declined significantly postoperatively. The patients in Wilkes III group had greater improvement in mandibular movement and pain than the patients in Wilkes II group. CONCLUSION: Arthrocentesis was reliable for treating both Wilkes II and III TMJ ID, and the treatment results were better in Wilkes III patients.