RESUMO
PURPOSE: Temporomandibular joint ankylosis (TMJA) in children is associated with retrognathia, reduction in pharyngeal airway volume (PAV), and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Distraction-osteogenesis (DO) is the proven method in the management of OSA. There is paucity in literature about the effect of distraction vector on PAV. It can be expected that an oblique vector would improve PAV and relieve OSA. Thus, the study was designed to explore the feasibility, advantages, and disadvantages of this modified technique for managing TMJA and OSA simultaneously. MATERIALS AND METHOD: The investigators designed a prospective study on patients of TMJA with retrognathia. Ethical approval was obtained (IECPG-547/14.11.2018). In all patients, simultaneous ankylosis release and mandibular distraction were performed. Primary outcome variables were improvement in 3-dimensional (3D) PAV and maximal interincisal opening (MIO). Secondary outcome variables were changed mandibular length, distraction relapse, and re-ankylosis. Paired t-test and multivariate ANOVA were used to assess all the parameters. RESULT: The study included 13 joints in 8 patients of TMJA with retrognathia (2 unilateral and 6 bilateral ankylosis) with mean age of 14.25 ± 7.37 years. Mean distraction performed was 19 ± 4.0 mm. There was a statistically significant improvement of PAV by 225% (p = 0.002), a reduction in Epworth's scale (p = 0.017), an increase in MIO (p = 0.001), and an increase in mandibular length. Three patients had re-ankylosis at the 25-month follow-up. CONCLUSION: The results of the present study conclude that modification of distraction vector improves 3D PAV and MIO in TMJA patients, with the added advantage of a reduction in overall treatment time and improved patient compliance.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: Although open temporomandibular joint arthroplasty with discopexy is a common treatment for patients with anterior disc displacements without reduction (ADDWo) unresponsive to medical management, there are no studies comparing disc repositioning with bone anchors and conventional discopexy procedure. The purpose of the study was to compare the efficacy between disc repositioning with bone anchors and the conventional discopexy procedure for ADDWo of temporomandibular joint refractory to medical management. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A randomized controlled trial was conducted in patients with ADDWo. The primary objective was to compare the improvement in mouth opening (primary outcome variable) between the 2 treatment (primary predictor variable) groups-disc repositioning with bone anchors versus conventional disc plication. Secondary outcome variables were pain measured by visual analog scale, lateral excursions, and position of the disc evaluated by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Other variables of interest were age, gender, and duration of symptoms. The parameters were evaluated at preoperative, postoperative day 1, and 1-, 6-, and 12-month postoperative period. Categorical variables were compared with χ2 test and continuous variables with analysis of variance and adjusted for multiple comparisons with Bonferroni test. RESULTS: The study sample comprised 14 patients (7 in each group) with MRI-proven ADDWo. Statistically significant differences were found in the improvement of mouth opening between the 2 groups, showing better improvement with bone anchors (14.42 ± 5.96 vs 7.57 ± 7.25 mm; P < .05). The reduction in visual analog scale also showed statistically significant difference with better pain reduction achieved with bone anchor (4.57 ± 1.61 vs 3.28 ± 0.75; P < .05). There was no statistically significant difference in lateral excursions and postoperative position of the disc evaluated by MRI between the groups at the 12-month follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: Disc repositioning with bone anchors provides better clinical outcomes in terms of maximal mouth opening and pain scores compared with conventional disc plication.
