Spray and stretch technique and its effects on mouth opening

Mouth opening limitation and influence of age and surgical location for static fully guided dental implant placement: an observational, cross-sectional clinical study

The influence of age and region of the mouth was assessed in regard to mouth opening in fully guided implant placement. Ninety patients were included in this study, 30 in each of three age groups (20-34, 35-55, and >55 years). Maximum passive mouth opening was recorded in three locations: incisal, canine, and molar. The minimum distance required to allow the bone drilling sequence through a static fully guided approach was analysed for four implant systems: Straumann, MIS Dentsply, Astra Tech Dentsply, and Dentium. The mean ± standard deviation maximum mouth opening (all 90 patients) was 46.34 ± 7.70 mm, 36.82 ± 5.92 mm, and 30.99 ± 5.40 mm in the incisal, premolar, and molar region, respectively. No significant difference in mouth opening at any of the three locations was found between the age groups (all P > 0.05). However, a correlation was found between increasing age and decreasing average mouth opening in all three mouth regions; each additional 1 year resulted in a mean reduction of 0.13 mm, 0.09 mm, and 0.08 mm in the incisal, premolar, and molar region, respectively. The minimum required mouth opening was most likely to be met for implant placement in the incisal region (98.9% of all patients) and least likely to be met for placement in the molar region, particularly for older patients (as low as 30% of patients). Mouth opening remains a major limitation in fully guided implant surgery, especially in posterior areas and in older patients. The use of some implant systems in the posterior area may be limited to only one in three patients.

An Evidence-Based Treatment of Myofascial Pain and Myofascial Trigger Points in the Maxillofacial Area: A Narrative Review

Myofascial pain (MFP) is characterized by localized pain in the maxillofacial region attributed to the presence of hypersensitive spots known as trigger points (TrPs). This condition is particularly prevalent in the maxillofacial area, warranting a comprehensive examination of evidence-based management techniques. This review aims to equip healthcare professionals with a more profound insight into evidence-based MFP management techniques, facilitating improved patient care and treatment outcomes. In this review, we conducted a thorough literature search using Google Scholar, Scopus, Web of Science (WOS), and MEDLINE, with the keywords "Myofascial pain syndrome," "Pain," and "Orofacial pain." Articles were selected based on their relevance to the study's objective. Pharmacological interventions, such as analgesics and muscle relaxants, are frequently prescribed. Additionally, a range of non-pharmacological modalities, including transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), ultrasound therapy, topical applications, dry needling, TrP injections, oral myofunctional therapy, and stretching exercises, have demonstrated efficacy in MFP management. The authors hope to give clinicians a more thorough understanding of the therapies for MFP by conducting a rigorous evidence-based evaluation of pharmacologic and non-pharmacological treatments. Our findings support the use of a combined approach that integrates both pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies for the holistic management of TrPs.