Clinical course of masticatory function recovery following arthrocentesis in patients with unilateral mandibular condyle head fracture. Issue 3 (March 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Nogami, Shinnosuke; Yamauchi, Kensuke; Izumita, Kuniyuki; Kitamura, Jun; Takeda, Yuri; Otake, Yoshio; Koyama, Shinki; Okuyama, Kyosuke; Sasaki, Keiichi; Takahashi, Tetsu
• Is Part Of: Journal of cranio-maxillofacial surgery. Volume 50:Issue 3(2022)
• Page Start: 225
• Page End: 229
• Publication Date: 2022-03
• Subjects: Mandibular condyle head fracture -- Arthrocentesis -- Occlusal contact area -- Maximum bite force -- Masticatory function; Skull -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Maxilla -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Face -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Surgery, Plastic -- Periodicals; Maxilla -- surgery -- Periodicals; Face -- surgery -- Periodicals; Skull -- surgery -- Periodicals; Oral Surgical Procedures -- Periodicals; Reconstructive Surgical Procedures -- Periodicals; Surgery, Plastic -- Periodicals; Surgery, Oral -- Periodicals; Electronic journals; 617.514
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jcms.2021.12.005
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1010-5182

Abstract

Abstract: The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical course of masticatory function recovery following arthrocentesis. Patients with a unilateral condylar head fracture who underwent arthrocentesis for therapeutic reasons were evaluated and compared with patients with a unilateral condylar head fracture who did not undergo arthrocentesis. At 3 months after treatment, the occlusal contact area and maximum bite force in patients with a fracture treated with arthrocentesis were greater than in those who did not receive arthrocentesis at the same time points, although the differences were not significant. Moreover, at 1 and 3 months following arthrocentesis, mean (±SD) occlusal contact area (1 month: 1.99 ± 0.55 mm 2, p = 0.01; 3 months: 2.90 ± 1.36 mm 2, p = 0.03) and maximum bite force (1 month: 82.45 ± 15.04 N, p = 0.01; 3 months: 101.11 ± 14.53 N, p = 0.01) on the fractured side in patients who underwent that treatment were significantly reduced when compared with those on the non-fractured side. The authors conclude that if the priority is to avoid open reduction and internal fixation, then the arthrocentesis approach might be a less invasive alternative, albeit with the price of a prolonged healing interval.