Botulinum toxin type A and acupuncture for masticatory myofascial pain: a randomized clinical trial

Effect of botulinum toxin type A on muscular temporomandibular disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Botulinum toxin type A (BTX-A) is increasingly used to manage painful temporomandibular disorders (TMD). However, the effect of BTX-A on muscular TMD remains unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy, safety and optimal dose of BTX-A for treating TMD.

METHODS

We conducted systematic literature searches in MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov and Cochrane Library until March 2023. We extracted data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the efficacy and safety of BTX-A in treating muscular TMD. We performed a meta-analysis using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Fifteen RCTs involving 504 participants met the inclusion criteria. BTX-A was significantly more effective than placebo in reducing pain intensity, as measured on a 0-10 scale, at 1 month (MD [95% CI] = -1.92 [-2.87, -0.98], p < .0001) and 6 months (MD [95% CI] -2.08, [-3.19 to -0.98]; p = .0002). A higher dosage of BTX-A (60-100 U bilaterally) was associated with a greater reduction in pain at 6 months (MD [95% CI] = -2.98 [-3.52, -2.44]; p < .001). BTX-A also resulted in decreased masseter muscle intensity (μV) (MD [95% CI] = -44.43 [-71.33, -17.53]; p = .001) at 1 month and occlusal force (kg) at 3 months (MD [95% CI] = -30.29 [-48.22 to -12.37]; p = .0009). There was no significant difference in adverse events between BTX-A and placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

BTX-A is a safe and effective treatment for reducing pain and improving temporomandibular muscle and joint function in muscular TMD patients. A bilateral dose of 60-100 U might be an optimal choice for treating muscular TMD pain.

The effectiveness of different types of acupuncture to reduce symptoms and disability for patients with orofacial pain. A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To determine the effectiveness of different types of acupuncture in reducing pain, improving maximum mouth opening and jaw functions in adults with orofacial pain.

METHODS

Six databases were searched until 15 June 2023. The Cochrane risk of bias tool and GRADE were employed to evaluate bias and overall evidence certainty.

RESULTS

Among 52 studies, 86.5% (n = 45) exhibited high risk of bias. Common acupoints, including Hegu LI 4, Jiache ST 6, and Xiaguan ST 7, were used primarily for patients with temporomandibular disorder [TMDs]. Meta-analyses indicated that acupuncture significantly reduced pain intensity in individuals with myogenous TMD (MD = 26.02 mm, I2=89%, p = 0.05), reduced tenderness in the medial pterygoid muscle (standardised mean differences [SMD] = 1.72, I2 = 0%, p < 0.00001) and jaw dysfunction (SMD = 1.62, I2 = 88%, p = 0.010) in mixed TMD when compared to sham/no treatment. However, the overall certainty of the evidence was very low for all outcomes as evaluated by GRADE.

CONCLUSION

The overall results in this review should be interpreted with caution as there was a high risk of bias across the majority of randomized controlled trial (RCTs), and the overall certainty of the evidence was very low. Therefore, future studies with high-quality RCTs are warranted evaluating the use of acupuncture in patients with orofacial pain.

Pharmacological Treatments of Temporomandibular Disorders: A Systematic Review Including a Network Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

Temporomandibular disorders (TMD) comprise a cluster of conditions with a wide range of etiological factors that causes pain and discomfort in the masticatory muscles (TMD-M) and temporomandibular joints (TMD-J). More than 50% of the patients with TMD report regular usage of drugs. However, there is still no consensus, nor is there any evidence-based support for clinicians when choosing between different drugs. Therefore, this systematic review, including a network meta-analysis (NMA), aimed to evaluate the scientific evidence and discuss the pharmacological treatment options available to treat painful TMD.

METHOD

An electronic search was undertaken to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating pharmacological treatments for TMD-M and/or TMD-J, published until 6 April 2023. Since only 11 articles could be used for an NMA regarding TMD-M, a narrative synthesis was also performed for all 40 included RCTs. The quality of evidence was rated according to Cochrane's tool for assessing risk of bias, while the certainty of evidence was rated according to Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).

RESULTS

When it comes to TMD-M, evidence arises for wet needling therapies with BTX-A, granisetron, and PRP as well as muscle relaxants. For TMD-J, evidence points toward pharmacological treatment approaches including non-steroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and glucocorticosteriods (for inflammatory conditions) as well as hyaluronic acid and dextrose.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence clearly indicates that the pharmacological treatment approaches differ between TMD-M and TMD-J. Therefore, it is of great importance to first try to uncover each patient's individual and multifactorial etiology and then employ a multifaceted treatment strategy, including pharmacological treatment approaches.

Botulinum Toxin and Percutaneous Needle Electrolysis for the Treatment of Chronic Masticatory Myalgia

Botulinum toxin type A (BTA) is applied in muscle hyperactivity disorders and injected into affected muscles, producing deep and persistent muscle relaxation. Several multidisciplinary groups investigated the treatment of temporomandibular disorders for several years, and there is currently some data on the beneficial effects of BTA in specific cases of chronic masticatory myalgia. Percutaneous needle electrolysis (PNE), which applies a low-intensity galvanic current to promote tissue regeneration, has been shown to be effective in reducing pain and improving masticatory function. The purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of BTA and to assess whether its application in patients with localized masticatory myalgia can significantly reduce pain and improve function compared to a group treated with PNE. Fifty-two patients with long-term refractory masticatory myalgia were randomly assigned to two groups. The BTA group (n = 26) received a bilateral botulinum toxin injection and the PNE group (n = 26) received percutaneous electrolysis. The dose of BTA injected was 100 units distributed among the main primary masticatory muscles, and PNE was administered at 0.5 mA/3 s/3 consecutive times in a single session. Patient assessments were performed prior to treatment and one, two, and three months after treatment. The results revealed good therapeutic response in both groups. In the long term, both BTA and PNE showed high efficacy and safety in reducing pain and improving muscle function for the treatment of chronic masticatory myalgia. This improvement was sustained over a three-month period in both groups. Therefore, the use of BTA and PNE could be considered a valid and safe therapeutic alternative among the available options to treat refractory and localized masticatory myalgia when a better therapeutic response is expected as it demonstrated high efficacy.

Effect of Botulinum Toxin Injection on EMG Activity and Bite Force in Masticatory Muscle Disorder: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Botulinum toxin type A (BoNT-A) is increasingly used in treating masticatory muscle pain disorder; however, safe doses and reinjection intervals still need to be established. The purpose of this randomized clinical trial was to evaluate the degree and duration of the impairment of masticatory muscle performance. Fifty-seven subjects were randomly divided into two groups: one of which received BoNT-A first (n = 28) while the other received saline first (n = 29), with the cross-over being in week 16, and a total follow-up period of 32 weeks. A total dose of 50 U of BoNT-A was injected in the masseter and temporal muscles bilaterally. Electromyographic (EMG) activity and bite forces were assessed. A significant reduction in EMG activity was observed up to week 18 (p ≤ 001), with total recovery at week 33. A significant reduction in maximum bite force was observed up to week 11 (p ≤ 005), with total recovery at week 25. In conclusion, when treating masticatory muscle pain disorder with 50 U of BoNT-A, a reinjection interval of 33 weeks can be considered safe since the recovery of muscle function occurs by that time.