Evaluation of trismus, bite force, and pressure algometry after third molar surgery: a placebo-controlled study of ibuprofen

Analgesic effect of ultrasound-guided extraoral mandibular nerve block compared to intraoral conductive block of the inferior alveolar nerve after lower third molar alveolectomy: a clinical prospective study

BACKGROUND

The analgesia after lower third molar alveolectomy is based on the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) that have significant risks, and are contraindicated in the third trimester of pregnancy. Aiming to reduce NSAIDs use after this surgery, we quantified analgesic effects of ultrasound (US)-guided extraoral mandibular nerve block.

METHODS

Thirty-six patients were equally allocated to the experimental or control group, based on their willingness to receive experimental US-guided extraoral mandibular nerve block for postoperative analgesia. The experimental block applied prior to lower third molar alveolectomy, was followed by standard intraoral inferior alveolar nerve block. In the control group, patients received only intraoral block of inferior alveolar nerve. All patients reported pain level (visual analogue scale, VAS) right after the application of blocks. The next day, patients reported duration of pain-free time and the use of analgesic.

RESULTS

The US-guided extraoral mandibular nerve block prolonged the pain-free time to 8 h (vs. 4 in control group, P < 0.001) and reduced NSAIDs use (12 patients needed analgesic in experimental vs. 17 patients in control group, P = 0.038). The application of experimental block was less painful (VAS = 2) than the application of intraoral inferior alveolar nerve block (VAS = 4, P = 0.011). In 8/18 patients in the experimental group US-guided extraoral mandibular nerve block solely achieved adequate surgical anesthesia.

CONCLUSION

US-guided extraoral mandibular nerve block prolonged pain-free period and reduced the use of NSAIDs after lower third molar alveolectomy, thus proving to be successful analgesia method for this dental surgery.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

https://classic.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov/ct2/show/NCT06009302 , identification number: NCT06009302, date of registration: 18/08/2023.

Cannabidiol as an Alternative Analgesic for Acute Dental Pain

Odontogenic pain can be debilitating, and nonopioid analgesic options are limited. This randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial aimed to assess the effectiveness and safety of cannabidiol (CBD) as an analgesic for patients with emergency acute dental pain. Sixty-one patients with moderate to severe toothache were randomized into 3 groups: CBD10 (CBD 10 mg/kg), CBD20 (CBD 20 mg/kg), and placebo. We administered a single dose of respective oral solution and monitored the subjects for 3 h. The primary outcome measure was the numerical pain differences using a visual analog scale (VAS) from baseline within and among the groups. Secondary outcome measures included ordinal pain intensity differences, the onset of significant pain relief, maximum pain relief, changes in bite force within and among the groups, psychoactive effects, mood changes, and other adverse events. Both CBD groups resulted in significant VAS pain reduction compared to their baseline and the placebo group, with a maximum median VAS pain reduction of 73% from baseline pain at the 180-min time point (P < 0.05). CBD20 experienced a faster onset of significant pain relief than CBD10 (15 versus 30 min after drug administration), and both groups reached maximum pain relief at 180-min. Number needed to treat was 3.1 for CBD10 and 2.4 for CBD20. Intragroup comparisons showed a significant increase in bite forces in both CBD groups (P < 0.05) but not in the placebo group (P > 0.05). CBD20 resulted in a significant difference in mean percent bite force change in the 90- and 180-min time points compared to the placebo group (P < 0.05). Compared to placebo, sedation, diarrhea, and abdominal pain were significantly associated with the CBD groups (P < 0.05). There were no other significant psychoactive or mood change effects. This randomized trial provides the first clinical evidence that oral CBD can be an effective and safe analgesic for dental pain.

Ibuprofen for acute postoperative pain in children

BACKGROUND

Children often require pain management following surgery to avoid suffering. Effective pain management has consequences for healing time and quality of life. Ibuprofen, a frequently used non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) administered to children, is used to treat pain and inflammation in the postoperative period.

OBJECTIVES

1) To assess the efficacy and safety of ibuprofen (any dose) for acute postoperative pain management in children compared with placebo or other active comparators. 2) To compare ibuprofen administered at different doses, routes (e.g. oral, intravenous, etc.), or strategies (e.g. as needed versus as scheduled).

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard Cochrane search methods. We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and trials registries in August 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in children aged 17 years and younger, treated for acute postoperative or postprocedural pain, that compared ibuprofen to placebo or any active comparator. We included RCTs that compared different administration routes, doses of ibuprofen and schedules.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We adhered to standard Cochrane methods for data collection and analysis. Our primary outcomes were pain relief reported by the child, pain intensity reported by the child, adverse events, and serious adverse events. We present results using risk ratios (RR) and standardised mean differences (SMD), with the associated confidence intervals (CI). We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 43 RCTs that enroled 4265 children (3935 children included in this review). We rated the overall risk of bias at the study level as high or unclear for 37 studies that had one or several unclear or high risk of bias judgements across the domains. We judged six studies as having a low risk of bias across all domains. Ibuprofen versus placebo (35 RCTs) No studies reported pain relief reported by the child or a third party, or serious adverse events. Ibuprofen probably reduces child-reported pain intensity less than two hours postintervention compared to placebo (SMD -1.12, 95% CI -1.39 to -0.86; 3 studies, 259 children; moderate-certainty evidence). Ibuprofen may reduce child-reported pain intensity, two hours to less than 24 hours postintervention (SMD -1.01, 95% CI -1.24 to -0.78; 5 studies, 345 children; low-certainty evidence). Ibuprofen may result in little to no difference in adverse events compared to placebo (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.23; 5 studies, 384 children; low-certainty evidence). Ibuprofen versus paracetamol (21 RCTs) No studies reported pain relief reported by the child or a third party, or serious adverse events. Ibuprofen likely reduces child-reported pain intensity less than two hours postintervention compared to paracetamol (SMD -0.42, 95% CI -0.82 to -0.02; 2 studies, 100 children; moderate-certainty evidence). Ibuprofen may slightly reduce child-reported pain intensity two hours to 24 hours postintervention (SMD -0.21, 95% CI -0.40 to -0.02; 6 studies, 422 children; low-certainty evidence). Ibuprofen may result in little to no difference in adverse events (0 events in each group; 1 study, 44 children; low-certainty evidence). Ibuprofen versus morphine (1 RCT) No studies reported pain relief or pain intensity reported by the child or a third party, or serious adverse events. Ibuprofen likely results in a reduction in adverse events compared to morphine (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.83; risk difference (RD) -0.25, 95% CI -0.40 to -0.09; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 4; 1 study, 154 children; moderate-certainty evidence). Ibuprofen versus ketorolac (1 RCT) No studies reported pain relief or pain intensity reported by the child, or serious adverse events. Ibuprofen may result in a reduction in adverse events compared to ketorolac (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.96; RD -0.29, 95% CI -0.53 to -0.04; NNTB 4; 1 study, 59 children; low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Despite identifying 43 RCTs, we remain uncertain about the effect of ibuprofen compared to placebo or active comparators for some critical outcomes and in the comparisons between different doses, schedules and routes for ibuprofen administration. This is largely due to poor reporting on important outcomes such as serious adverse events, and poor study conduct or reporting that reduced our confidence in the results, along with small underpowered studies. Compared to placebo, ibuprofen likely results in pain reduction less than two hours postintervention, however, the efficacy might be lower at two hours to 24 hours. Compared to paracetamol, ibuprofen likely results in pain reduction up to 24 hours postintervention. We could not explore if there was a different effect in different kinds of surgeries or procedures. Ibuprofen likely results in a reduction in adverse events compared to morphine, and in little to no difference in bleeding when compared to paracetamol. We remain mostly uncertain about the safety of ibuprofen compared to other drugs.

Opioid-Prescribing Patterns in Connecticut and New Jersey Following Third Molar Extractions

OBJECTIVE

In recent years, opioid misuse has resulted in much scrutiny on providers' prescribing habits. The purpose of this study was to analyze prescribing habits in the context of third molar extractions as a model for promoting better postsurgical pain management.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional survey of oral maxillofacial surgeons in Connecticut and New Jersey. A total of 291 practitioners were contacted to complete an online survey using Qualtrics Research Services to determine prescribing habits following third molar extractions.

RESULTS

The most common approach for postoperative analgesia was nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and an opioid/acetaminophen (APAP) combination as 2 separate prescriptions, reported by 36% of participants. The combination of hydrocodone/APAP was the most common opioid formulation, and an average of 10.93 ± 4.51 opioid pills were prescribed with a maximum of 20 pills reported. Most providers (79%) consistently provided patients with opioid information. Only 22% reported always checking opioid-monitoring programs; however, providers were more likely to check if prescribing more than ∼11 opioid pills (P = .0228). Most reported using dexamethasone (82%) and bupivacaine (56%) intraoperatively, while ketorolac was less common (15%). No association was found between the quantity of opioids prescribed and the use of intraoperative ketorolac, steroids, or bupivacaine (P > .05).

CONCLUSION

There remains to be a universal standard for using opioids for postoperative pain management in dentistry. Providers should be mindful when prescribing opioids and consider using NSAIDs and APAP for baseline pain plus a separate opioid prescription for breakthrough pain. Additional focus on minimizing the quantity of opioids prescribed and self-reflecting on prescribing and practice habits to further reduce opioid-related complications is warranted.

Local anesthesia in oral and maxillofacial surgery: A review of current opinion

Local anesthesia (LA) is the most important pain management process in oral and maxillofacial surgery. Safe and effective LA not only enable patients to obtain high-quality treatment, but also relieve the anxiety of patients when they come to the clinic. The choices of local anesthetic and injection methods determine the success of LA to a great extent. At present, in most countries or regions, common local anesthetics used in oral and maxillofacial surgery belong to amides and they are injected into patients' body mainly through block or infiltration anesthesia. In addition, the operators' technique level, patient's subjective psychology and anatomical variation of maxillofacial structure also have a strong influence on LA in dental clinic. Due to the existence of above factors, the worldwide success rates of LA in oral and maxillofacial surgery is very different. There are no specific LA methods that ensure 100% successful LA rates. Fortunately, the development of new local anesthetic and injection technology are providing us with new ideas to solve this problem. This review mainly report the new research progress on LA in oral and maxillofacial surgery in recent decades and help clinicians with dental LA operation.

A comparative study of the effect of two dosages of submucosal injection of dexamethasone on postoperative discomfort after third molar surgery: a prospective randomized study

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this clinical study was to evaluate and compare the relative efficacy of two different dosages of dexamethasone, i.e., 4 and 8 mg injected submucosally to reduce postoperative discomfort after mandibular third molar surgery.

METHODOLOGY

A prospective randomized study was conducted on 45 patients requiring surgical removal of an impacted third molar. Selected patients were divided randomly into three groups of 15 patients each: group I patients received one regimen single dose of 4 mg dexamethasone submucosally, group II received one regimen single dose of 8 mg dexamethasone submucosally, and group III (control group), no dexamethasone was given but only received injection of normal saline submucosally after establishing local anesthesia. The postoperative sequelae were assessed on the second and seventh postoperative day.

RESULT

As compared to group III, groups I and II showed statistically significant reduction in pain and swelling whereas no statistically significant difference was found between the test groups.

CONCLUSION

It can be concluded that corticosteroids are effective in curtailing the postoperative edema of lower third molar surgery but have negligible analgesic effect. As no statistically significant difference is found between both the regimes of dexamethasone, i.e., 4 and 8 mg so within the confines of our study, it may be concluded that 4 mg dexamethasone can be given safely to reduce the postoperative edema after the third molar surgery.

The Efficacy of Four Ways of Administrating Dexamethasone during Surgical Extraction of Partially Impacted Lower Third Molars

Glucocorticoids are drugs noted for their potent anti-inflammatory effect and long lasting half-life. Various studies have been carried out to identify which of these molecules is best for reducing the post-operative sequelae after surgical extraction of the impacted lower third molar. This study examines four different ways of administering dexamethasone after surgical extraction of impacted lower third molars: endoalveolar application, submucous injection, intravenous administration and intramuscular injection, with the aim of identifying which method gives the least discomfort to the patient in regard to reduction of pain, edema and post-operative lock-jaw. Results show that a greater reduction of the post-operative sequelae was obtained in the group of patients treated with dexamethasone intravenously. Satisfying results were also obtained in the group treated with a topical administration of dexamethasone in powder form and in the group which was given dexamethasone through an intramuscular injection. These last two groups had similar results. Instead, the results obtained in the group that received dexamethasone through local submucous injection were not satisfactory.

Reproducibility of Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Pain Scores to Mechanical Pressure

This study tested the reproducibility of visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores to measure changes in masseter muscle pain evoked by maximally tolerable mechanical stimulation over a short time period in healthy subjects. This study also evaluated gender differences in reproducibility of VAS scores to mechanical stimulation. Ten healthy female and eight healthy male individuals participated in this study. The recordings of VAS pain scores to an identical mechanical pressure on the masseter muscle were performed at three different sessions (T1, T2, and T3). The subjects rated their pain on a VAS to a maximally tolerable stimulus that was recorded on an algometer at the first session. The algometer pressure reading was recorded for each subject and then used to duplicate the same identical mechanical stimulus at each of the three sessions. This identical pressure was repeated in the same marked spot at six minutes and after 30 minutes. The subjects rated the pain on a VAS to this identical stimulus at each session. There was no significant difference in VAS pain scores of all subjects at T1, T2, and T3. There was no significant difference in reproducibility of VAS pain scores in females compared to males. Intraclass correlation coefficients were 0.811 on the right masseter and 0.844 on the left masseter. VAS pain scores to mechanical stimulation were reproducible over a short time period. Gender did not affect the reproducibility. This previously unreported method of measuring pain to repeated identical mechanical stimulation appears to have potential for both clinical and research application.

Dipirona versus paracetamol no controle da dor pós-operatória

INTRODUÇÃO: A dor é definida como uma experiência desagradável, sendo o controle da dor pós-operatória um grande desafio na área da saúde. OBJETIVO: Comparar a eficácia da dipirona e do paracetamol no controle da dor pós-operatória após exodontia de terceiros molares inclusos. MATERIAL E MÉTODO: Foram selecionados 30 pacientes da Disciplina de Cirurgia da Faculdade de Odontologia de Araçatuba - UNESP, que necessitavam extrair os terceiros molares inclusos. Desses, 15 receberam dipirona (Grupo I) e outros 15 receberam paracetamol (Grupo II) no pós-operatório. Todos os pacientes foram tratados, no pré-operatório, uma hora antes do procedimento cirúrgico, com dexametasona 4 mg e amoxicilina 1 grama. A intensidade da dor foi avaliada pelos pacientes por meio de escala visual analógica, em um período pós-operatório de 48 horas, em intervalos de 6 horas. Os critérios de exclusão foram: presença de desordens sistêmicas, hipersensibilidade medicamentosa, gestação, lactação e contraindicações locais. Os escores obtidos foram submetidos ao teste de Mann-Whitney (α = 0,05) para comparação das intensidades de dor em intervalos de 6 horas, nas 24 horas iniciais, nas 24 horas finais e no período total de 48 horas. RESULTADO: Não houve diferença estatística entre os analgésicos estudados nos intervalos de 6 horas; entretanto, nas 24 horas finais e nas 48 horas totais de observação, o Grupo I apresentou valores médios menores, estatisticamente significantes, quando comparado ao Grupo II. CONCLUSÃO: A eficácia analgésica da dipirona foi superior à do paracetamol.

Adding propacetamol to ketorolac increases the tolerance to painful pressure

Combining an NSAID and paracetamol (acetaminophen) has in some studies given superior analgesia compared with the single drugs. In other trials no additive effect has been found. We have investigated the effect of this drug combination on the pressure pain tolerance threshold (PPTT), a reproducible correlate to clinical pain. The aim of this double blind, randomised, placebo controlled, crossover study was to evaluate the effect of i.v. propacetamol 2 g (= paracetamol 1 g) and ketorolac 30 mg, individually and in combination, on PPTT in 16 volunteers on four separate days. PPTT was measured 15 min before and at 45, 60, 90 and 150 min after the start of test drug administration. The pressure stimuli were applied on the base of a fingernail, increasing by 30 kPa/s until the pressure pain tolerance threshold was reached. For the total observation period (150 min), only the combination (propacetamol+ketorolac) increased significantly PPTT compared with baseline (P<0.04), while PPTT decreased significantly after placebo (P<0.01). The combination (propacetamol+ketorolac) and ketorolac alone increased PPTT compared with placebo (combination vs. placebo and ketorolac vs. placebo, P<0.001) and with propacetamol (combination vs. propacetamol and ketorolac vs. propacetamol, P<0.001). The combination was significantly better than ketorolac alone (P<0.04). After propacetamol 2 g, PPTT did not change significantly neither compared with placebo or baseline.

CONCLUSIONS

Tolerance to repeated painful pressure (PPTT) decreased after placebo. Ketorolac 30 mg caused an increase in PPTT compared with placebo but not with baseline. Adding propacetamol 2 g to ketorolac 30 mg significantly increased PPTT. These findings support the practice of combining paracetamol with an NSAID for relief of acute pain.

Pain control following impacted third molar surgery with bupivacaine irrigation of tooth socket: a prospective study

Background and aims

The surgical removal of the lower third molars is a procedure generally followed by side effects such as postoperative pain. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of socket irrigation with an anesthetic solution in relieving pain following impacted third molar surgery.

Materials and methods

Thirty-four patients (17 males and 17 females), aged 18-24 years, with bilateral impacted lower third molars were selected. Both third molars were extracted in one surgical session. Tooth sockets in each patient were rinsed randomly either with 4 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine hydrochloride plain (without vasoconstrictor) anesthetic solu-tion or 4 mL of normal saline, used as control. The patients were instructed not to use analgesics as long as possible, and if not, they were instructed to use an analgesic, and record the time. Pain severity was assessed using a visual analogue pain scale (VAPS) at 1-, 6-, 12-, and 24-hour intervals post-operatively. Data were analyzed using Pearson’s chi-square test and P <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

Post-operative pain difference between the two groups was statistically significant at 1-, 6-, 12- and 24-hour post-operative intervals (P <0.05). Post-operative pain increased in both groups to a maximum 12 hours after surgery with signif-icant improvements after that.

Conclusion

Based on the results, the irrigation of surgery site with bupivacaine after third molar surgery significantly reduces post-operative pain.

Implant surgery using bone- and mucosa-supported stereolithographic guides in totally edentulous jaws: surgical and post-operative outcomes of computer-aided vs. standard techniques

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to compare the surgical and post-operative outcomes of a computer-aided implant surgery performed by bone- and mucosa-supported stereolithographic (SLA) guides against the standard technique.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Multiple- and single-type SLA guides from two commercial manufacturers were produced and a total of 341 implants were placed to 52 patients using the standard technique (Control group), bone- (bone-supported guide [BSG] group) and mucosa-supported SLA guides (Flapless group) in 21, 16 and 15 patients, respectively. Surgical duration (min), number of analgesics (tablets) as well as hemorrhage, difficulty in mouth opening (or trismus) and other incidences were recorded. Pain and swelling was assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS). Parametric and non-parametric tests were used for statistical analysis (P<.05).

RESULTS

The mean surgery duration (23.53+/-5.48 min) and the number of analgesics consumed (four tablets) in the Flapless group were lower than those in the control (68.71+/-11.4 min and 10 tablets) and BSG groups (60.94+/-13.07 min and 11 tablets, P<0.01). The change in pain scores (VAS) and the number of analgesics consumed in time were statistically significant (P<0.01 and 0.05, respectively) and the Flapless group reported a lower pain score than the BSG (P<0.01) and Control groups (P<0.001). The Flapless group experienced less hemorrhage (chi(2)=4.12, P=0.041 on the day of surgery) and fewer instances of trismus (chi(2)=6.91, P=0.031 the day after surgery). The differences in early-term failures were not statistically significant between the groups (log-rank test: P=0.782).

CONCLUSION

The use of mucosa-supported single SLA guides for flapless implant placement may help reduce the surgery duration, pain intensity, related analgesic consumption and most other complications typical in the post-implant surgery period. However, there are particular drawbacks in both guide types and further studies are required to confirm the prosthodontic conformity and long-term success of implants placed using computer-assisted techniques.

Single dose oral ibuprofen for acute postoperative pain in adults

BACKGROUND

This review updates a 1999 Cochrane review showing that ibuprofen at various doses was effective in postoperative pain in single dose studies designed to demonstrate analgesic efficacy. New studies have since been published. Ibuprofen is one of the most widely used non-steroidal anti-inflammatory (NSAID) analgesics both by prescription and as an over-the-counter medicine. Ibuprofen is used for acute and chronic painful conditions.

OBJECTIVES

To assess analgesic efficacy of ibuprofen in single oral doses for moderate and severe postoperative pain in adults.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Oxford Pain Relief Database for studies to May 2009.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised, double blind, placebo-controlled trials of single dose orally administered ibuprofen (any formulation) in adults with moderate to severe acute postoperative pain.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Pain relief or pain intensity data were extracted and converted into the dichotomous outcome of number of participants with at least 50% pain relief over 4 to 6 hours, from which relative risk and number-needed-to-treat-to-benefit (NNT) were calculated. Numbers of participants using rescue medication over specified time periods, and time to use of rescue medication, were sought as additional measures of efficacy. Information on adverse events and withdrawals were collected.

MAIN RESULTS

Seventy-two studies compared ibuprofen and placebo (9186 participants). Studies were predominantly of high reporting quality, and the bulk of the information concerned ibuprofen 200 mg and 400 mg. For at least 50% pain relief compared with placebo the NNT for ibuprofen 200 mg (2690 participants) was 2.7 (2.5 to 3.0) and for ibuprofen 400 mg (6475 participants) it was 2.5 (2.4 to 2.6). The proportion with at least 50% pain relief was 46% with 200 mg and 54% with 400 mg. Remedication within 6 hours was less frequent with higher doses, with 48% remedicating with 200 mg and 42% with 400 mg. The median time to remedication was 4.7 hours with 200 mg and 5.4 hours with 400 mg. Sensitivity analysis indicated that pain model and ibuprofen formulation may both affect the result, with dental impaction models and soluble ibuprofen salts producing better efficacy estimates. Adverse events were uncommon, and not different from placebo.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The very substantial amount of high quality evidence demonstrates that ibuprofen is an effective analgesic in treating postoperative pain. NNTs for 200 mg and 400 mg ibuprofen did not change significantly from the previous review even when a substantial amount of new information was added. New information is provided on remedication.

Evaluation of pain perception in patients with temporomandibular disorders

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to assess the pain perception of patients with temporomandibular disorders and to investigate a possible association between pain sensitivity and temporomandibular disorders.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Fifty patients with temporomandibular disorders who were diagnosed according to research diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular disorders and 45 healthy volunteers were conducted. Visual analog scale, designed as 0 being no pain and 100 being worst pain ever experienced, was used to determine subjective pain expression during maximum mouth opening in patients and control subjects. All subjects' pressure pain thresholds were measured 3 times on the hypothenar region of the left hand with a mechanical algometer. Mean value of measured scores was assumed to be the general pressure pain threshold of the individual.

RESULTS

Patients with temporomandibular disorder had significantly lower general pressure pain threshold values than pain-free subjects. Women had lower general pressure pain threshold values than men within groups as well. In the patient group, those with limited mouth opening (</=40 mm) had significantly lower general pressure pain threshold values. Patients with general pressure pain threshold scores equal or less than 6 kg/cm(2) had higher visual analog scale scores (>50 mm). However this result was statistically insignificant.

CONCLUSIONS

According to the results of this study temporomandibular disorder patients were significantly different in terms of general pain perception. Systemic pain regulation mechanisms might be involved in temporomandibular disorder development. Some symptoms of temporomandibular disorder patients such as movement limitation and subjective pain expression might be originated from pain perception discrepancies besides severity of disease.

The Development of a Diagnostic Instrument for the Measurement of Mechanical Allodynia

Mechanical allodynia, defined as a reduction in mechanical pain threshold, is an essential diagnostic feature of inflammation of the periodontal ligament. Traditional methods for measuring mechanical allodynia in a tooth are not quantitative. This study evaluated the reliability of a new bite force transducer to measure mechanical pain thresholds, which might have application as a quantitative diagnostic aid for measuring mechanical allodynia in patients with apical periodontitis. To determine inter-observer reliability, subjects (n = 40) were given standardized instructions before generating maximal bite force on maxillary first molars; readings were then recorded by three examiners for a total of ten readings per examiner. To determine the test-retest reliability, the initial examiner then retested at two different sessions. The intraclass correlation coefficient was fair to substantial for inter-observer reliability (0.3-0.64) and substantial for intra-observer reliability (0.63-0.68). Thus, the force transducer used in our study is a reliable method to measure mechanical pain thresholds in endodontic patients.

Changes in jaw muscle EMG activity and pain after third molar surgery

Limited jaw-opening capacity is frequently encountered following third molar surgery and may impair function. The aim of this study was to investigate the electromyographic (EMG) activity in jaw muscles after third molar surgery to obtain more insight into the mechanisms of restrictions in jaw opening. Twenty subjects were examined before, 24 h and 1 week after surgery. Ten healthy controls were subjected to the same examination at two different occasions for intersession variability. The EMG activity of the masseter and anterior digastricus muscles was recorded at different jaw positions and during maximum voluntary clenching. Pain intensity was assessed at rest and during movements. The EMG activity in the jaw muscles increased with opening level (P < 0.01), but did not change after surgery. In contrast, the EMG activity during clenching was decreased in all muscles after surgery (P < 0.05). The pain intensity after surgery increased with jaw opening level (P < 0.001), but was in general not correlated to EMG level. Pain intensity during clenching was increased after surgery (P < 0.001), but not correlated to EMG level. The EMG activity did not change between visits in the control group. In conclusion, the results indicate that third molar surgery does not influence the EMG activity in the masseter and anterior digastricus muscles during various levels of static jaw opening, but decreases the EMG activity during clenching. However, these changes are not influenced by pain intensity. The results have implications for the understanding of the phenomenon of trismus.

Experience versus complication rate in third molar surgery

Objectives

The records of 1087 patients who underwent surgical removal of third molar teeth were prospectively examined to analyse the possible relationship between postoperative complications and the surgeon's experience parameter.

Method and materials

Seven surgeons (three specialists in surgical dentistry [specialists SD] and four oral and maxillofacial Senior House Officers [OMFS residents]) carried out the surgical procedures. For each patient, several variables were recorded including age, gender, radiographic position of extracted teeth, treating surgeon, duration of surgery and postoperative complications.

Results

Analysis of the data revealed some differences in the incidence of complications produced by the specialists SD and OMFS residents. The main statistically relevant differences were increase the incidences of trismus, nerve paraesthesia, alveolar osteitis and infection in the resident-treated group, while the specialist-treated group showed higher rates of post-operative bleeding.

Conclusion

The higher rate of postoperative complications in the resident-treated group suggests that at least some of the complications might be related to surgical experience.

Further work needs to compare specialists of training programmes with different years of experience, using large cross – sectional studies.

Preemptive rofecoxib and dexamethasone for prevention of pain and trismus following third molar surgery *

Objective The goal of this preliminary randomized prospective clinical trial was to compare the analgesic efficacy and the reduction in trismus of preoperative rofecoxib, intraoperative dexamethasone, and both rofecoxib and dexamethasone following third molar extraction surgery. Study design Thirty-five subjects requiring surgical removal of at least 1 partial bony impacted mandibular third molar were invited to participate in this double-blind and double-dummy placebo-controlled clinical trial. Subjects were randomly assigned into 1 of 4 treatment groups: (1) placebo po preoperatively and placebo IV intraoperatively; (2) rofecoxib 50 mg po preoperatively and placebo IV intraoperatively; (3) placebo po preoperatively and dexamethasone10 mg IV intraoperatively; and (4) rofecoxib 50 mg po preoperatively and dexamethasone 10 mg IV intraoperatively. Subjects completed a diary assessing postoperative pain onset and intensity using categorical and visual analogue scales. Interincisal opening was assessed 1, 2, 3, and 7 days postoperatively using a Therabite ruler. Results This randomized controlled clinical trial enrolled 35 subjects. Two subjects did not meet the inclusion criteria and 4 did not return completed diaries. The mean age of the remaining 29 subjects (11 males, 18 females) was 22.8 years (+/- 0.6 year). The active treatments tended to delay the need for initial pain medication. When compared to other active treatments and to placebo, the combination of preoperative rofecoxib and intraoperative dexamethasone significantly reduced initial pain intensity ( P < .05). Baseline interincisal opening was 52.6 mm (+/- 6.2). The greatest decrease in interincisal opening was 43.3% for the placebo group at 24 hours. Preoperative rofecoxib alone showed a decrease in interincisal opening of 42.3% ( P = ns) at 24 hours. Intraoperative dexamethasone alone showed a decrease in the interincisal opening of 24.1% of baseline ( P < .05 vs placebo). The group receiving the combination of rofecoxib and dexamethasone showed a decrease in interincisal opening of 23.7% of baseline ( P < .05 vs placebo). Conclusions The results of this trial indicate that the use of intraoperative dexamethasone is an effective therapeutic strategy for limiting trismus following surgical removal of impacted third molars. The combination of preoperative rofecoxib 50 mg and intraoperative dexamethasone 10 mg was most effective in minimizing pain and trismus following third molar surgery.

Pressure-pain function in desensitized and hypersensitized muscle and skin assessed by cuff algometry

This study assessed a newly developed cuff pressure algometry during discrete leg skin/muscle sensitization and anesthesia. Experimental setup consisted of a pneumatic tourniquet cuff, a computer-controlled air compressor, and an electronic visual analog scale (VAS). The first experiment assessed cuff algometry before and after selective anesthesia of the skin and the muscle under the cuff. The second experiment assessed cuff algometry before and during skin and muscle sensitization with capsaicin cream and injection of capsaicin. Pressure-pain detection threshold, pressure equivalent to the pain intensity of 2 on the VAS (PVAS2), pressure-pain tolerance threshold, and pressure-pain stimulus-response (SR) function were evaluated. Local anesthesia of the muscle increased the pain thresholds significantly and shifted the average SR function to the right indicating desensitization, whereas cutaneous anesthesia did not affect the pressure thresholds and increased the slope of the SR function. Capsaicin cream did not affect pressure-pain tolerance threshold, whereas PVAS2 and the slope of the SR function were significantly decreased. Intramuscular capsaicin injection decreased the pain thresholds and did not affect the slope of the SR function. Both interventions shifted the SR function to the left. The cuff algometry reliably assessed the pressure-pain SR function during muscle sensitization/desensitization and might supplement conventional pressure algometry for standardized pressure-pain function assessment.

Spatial and temporal aspects of deep tissue pain assessed by cuff algometry

This study assessed spatial and temporal aspects of pressure pain during increasing and constant compressions using a cuff algometer and during adaptive compressions using a closed-loop feedback system for maintaining stable pain. Experimental setup consisted of a pneumatic tourniquet cuff, a computer-controlled air compressor, and a 10-cm electronic visual analogue scale (VAS). The first experiment assessed spatial summation for cuff pain by recording the pressure-pain stimulus-response (SR) function during increasing compressions with single and double cuffs. The second experiment assessed temporal profile of cuff pain during constant compression for 10 min beginning at pain intensities of 2, 4, and 6 cm on the VAS. The third experiment assessed temporal pressure profile when pain was maintained for 10 min by a close-loop system within target zones of +/-0.5 cm VAS at pain intensities of 2, 4, and 6 cm on the VAS.Doubling the tissue volume under the cuff shifted the SR function to the left, demonstrating spatial summation. The constant cuff pressure evoked typical biphasic response consisting of an overshoot in pain intensity, followed by decreasing pain, or adaptation. The pain intensity was significantly correlated to the time of constant stimulation, showing time-dependency of pain encoding. Both overshoot magnitude and adaptation rate were dependent on the starting pain intensity. The pain decrease rate was lowest for a pain intensity of 2 cm on the VAS. The overshoot magnitude was lowest for a pain intensity of 6 cm on the VAS. Both the overshoot and the adaptation were maximal for a pain intensity of 4 cm on the VAS. The oscillating pressure generated by closed-loop system led to constant rather than adapting pain at intensities of 2, 4, and 6 cm on the VAS. The cuff algometer is highly configurable tool for assessment of pain sensitivity by pressure-pain and time-pain functions. The presented models are useful additions to a researcher's armamentarium for further pharmacological and clinical studies on deep tissue pain and related mechanisms.

Computer-controlled pneumatic pressure algometry--a new technique for quantitative sensory testing

Hand-held pressure algometry usually assesses pressure-pain detection thresholds and provides little information on pressure-pain stimulus-response function. In this article, a cuff pressure algometry for advanced pressure-pain function evaluation is proposed. The experimental set-up consisted of a pneumatic tourniquet cuff, a computer-controlled air compressor and an electronic visual analogue scale (VAS) for constant pain intensity rating. Twelve healthy volunteers were included in the study. In the first part, hand-held algometry and cuff algometry were performed over the gastrocnemius muscle with constant compression rate. In the second part, the cuff algometry was performed with different compression rates to evaluate the influence of the compression rate on pain thresholds and other psychophysical data. Pressure-pain detection threshold (PDT), pain tolerance threshold (PTT), pain intensity, PDT-PTT time and other psychophysical variables were evaluated.Pressure-pain detection thresholds recorded over the gastrocnemius muscle with a hand-held and with a cuff algometer, were 482 +/- 19 kPa and 26 +/- 1.6 kPa, respectively. Pressure and pain intensities were correlated during cuff algometry. During increasing cuff compression, the subjective pain tolerance limit on VAS was 5.6 +/- 0.95 cm. There was a direct correlation between the number of compressions, the compression rate and pain thresholds. The cuff algometry technique is appropriate for pressure-pain stimulus-response studies. Cuff algometry allowed quantification of psychophysical response to the change of stimulus configuration.