Quintessence International, 5/2021
DOI: 10.3290/j.qi.b1044039, PubMed ID (PMID): 33688715Pages 384-392, Language: English
Objectives: Endodontic treatment is a routine procedure performed by general dental practitioners and endodontists on a daily basis. Fortunately, most patients undergoing endodontic therapy show a favorable outcome with uneventful healing. However, some patients develop pain following endodontic therapy. A majority of these patients develop acute, nociceptive pain (“flare-up”) that resolves with appropriate treatment and subsequent healing. The dental profession is very adept at successfully managing the acute pain that occurs early following endodontic treatment. A minority of patients, however, develop ongoing pain following root canal therapy, termed chronic if persisting for 3 months or more. The diagnosis and management of chronic postendodontic pain are often challenging. This article aims to review pain following endodontic therapy, ranging from acute to chronic pain and its management, with specific emphasis on chronic pain, its pathophysiology, clinical features, diagnostic criteria, and management modalities.
Conclusion: Endodontic treatment rarely leads to chronic neuropathic pain; however, when the nerve injury occurs and results in posttraumatic trigeminal neuropathic pain (PTNP), treatment options are very limited and rarely successful. Therefore, all steps should be taken to avoid nerve injury. Prevention of endodontic treatment related PTNP is crucial and achieved through early recognition, and prompt management.
Keywords: acute pain, chronic pain, endodontics, neuropathic pain, postendodontic therapy, traumatic nerve injury, trigeminal nerve
Journal of Oral & Facial Pain and Headache, 4/2021
DOI: 10.11607/ofph.2021.4.ePages 267-269, Language: English
Journal of Oral & Facial Pain and Headache, 5/2020
SupplementPages 11, Language: English
Journal of Oral & Facial Pain and Headache, 4/2020
Pages 301-302, Language: English
Journal of Oral & Facial Pain and Headache, 2/2020
Pages 121-128, Language: English
Aims: To test and re-examine the diagnostic criteria for neurovascular orofacial pain (NVOP) compared to posttraumatic trigeminal neuropathy (PTTN).
Methods: Pain and patient characteristics were compared in patients with NVOP, PTTN, and NVOP initiated by trauma (PT-NVOP). NVOP criteria were based on prior studies, and PTTN was defined according to the International Classification of Headache Disorders, version 3 beta.
Results: Of the 170 patients in the cohort, 90 had PTTN, 51 had NVOP, and 29 had PT-NVOP. None of the tested parameters in the NVOP and PT-NVOP patients were significantly different, and therefore these patients were combined into one group (T-NVOP). T-NVOP differed significantly from PTTN (P < .001) in periodic pain patterns, presence of autonomic and systemic signs, throbbing pain quality, and frequency of bilaterality. Pain quality in PTTN was more burning/stabbing than in NVOP (P = .003). Pain severity, waking from sleep, muscle sensitivity to palpation, and demographics were comparable.
Conclusion: NVOP differs from PTTN in parameters essential to diagnosis: periodicity of pain, presence of autonomic and systemic accompanying signs, throbbing pain quality, and bilateral presentation. NVOP is amenable to abortive and prophylactic antimigraine therapies, distinguishing NVOP from PTTN in clinical features, treatment, and prognosis.
Keywords: migraine, neurovascular orofacial pain, persistent idiopathic facial pain, post traumatic trigeminal neuropathy
Journal of Oral & Facial Pain and Headache, 1/2020
Pages 67-76, Language: English
Aims: To analyze cervical tenderness scores (CTS) in patients with various temporomandibular disorders (TMD) and in controls and to examine associations of CTS with demographic and clinical parameters.
Methods: This case-control study included 192 TMD patients and 99 controls diagnosed based on a questionnaire and a clinical examination following the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC/TMD) guidelines. CTS, adapted from the widely used total tenderness score, was the mean sum of the palpation scores from the suboccipital, sternocleidomastoid, and trapezius muscles. Depending on the variables, data were analyzed using Pearson chi-square, analysis of variance, t test, Bonferroni post hoc adjustment, and/or multivariate linear regression analyses.
Results: CTS was higher in TMD patients compared to controls (P < .001). Across TMD subgroups, CTS was notable only in those with a myogenous TMD diagnosis, but not in arthrogenous TMD (P = .014). CTS was positively associated with: female sex (P = .03), whiplash history, higher verbal pain scores, comorbid headaches, body pain, increased pain on mouth opening, and higher masticatory muscles tenderness scores (MTS) (P < .001 for all). Sex (P < .001), MTS (P < .001), comorbid headache (P = .042), and pain on opening (mild: P = .031; moderate: P = .022) retained significant associations with CTS in the multivariate analysis, and these main effects were influenced by interactions with whiplash history and comorbid body pain.
Conclusion: CTS differentiated between TMD patients and controls and between TMD diagnoses. Specific patient and pain characteristics associated with poor outcome in terms of CTS included effects of interactions between myogenous TMD, female sex, whiplash history, comorbid body pain and headaches, and pain on opening. It can therefore be concluded that routine clinical examination of TMD patients should include assessment of the cervical region.
Keywords: cervical muscle tenderness, masticatory muscle disorders, muscle tenderness score, temporomandibular disorders
Journal of Oral & Facial Pain and Headache, 3/2019
Pages 245-246, Language: English
Journal of Oral & Facial Pain and Headache, 2/2019
Pages 143-152, Language: English
Aims: To evaluate the effect of nonstrenuous aerobic exercise on chronic masticatory myalgia (CMM) patients and healthy controls (HC) by means of mechanical temporal summation (TS) and response to mechanical stimulation (RMS) performed on the dominant forearm.
Methods: A total of 30 patients diagnosed with CMM and 30 pain-free HCs were first evaluated for maximum number of steps (MNS) on a stepper machine for 1 minute. Additionally, they completed the Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7), Graded Chronic Pain Scale (GCPS), and Jaw Functional Limitation Scale (JFL) questionnaires. On the second visit, RMS, mechanical TS, exercise-induced hypoalgesia (EIH), blood pressure, pulse pressure, and heart rate were assessed prior to and immediately, 5, 15, and 30 minutes following 5 minutes of stepper exercise at 50% MNS.
Results: Compared to HCs, CMM patients demonstrated increased mechanical TS and less efficient EIH. Mechanical TS scores were reduced in both groups; however, the HC reduction was more robust and persistent. CMM patients demonstrated a delayed reduction in RMS following exercise in contrast to an immediate reduction in HCs. GAD-7, GCPS, and JFL scores for CMM patients were higher than for HCs and were associated with baseline pain intensity but not with EIH or TS.
Conclusion: These findings suggest that, compared to HC, CMM patients' pain modulation is both suppressed and has a different effect duration and timing pattern. Further research should explore the mechanisms and clinical relevance of the delayed hypoalgesia and the inhibitory effect on TS induced by nonstrenuous aerobic exercise in CMM patients.
Keywords: exercise, masticatory myalgia, myofascial pain, pain modulation, temporomandibular disorders
Journal of Oral & Facial Pain and Headache, 1/2019
Pages 7-13, Language: English
Aims: To evaluate and compare the pharmacotherapeutic efficacies of two tricyclic antidepressant (TCA) drugs for masticatory myofascial pain (MFP): nortriptyline (NOR) and amitriptyline (AMI).
Methods: Fifty patients with chronic MFP were included in the study; 30 were medicated with AMI only, and 20 took NOR after discontinuing AMI due to adverse effects. Pain diaries recording verbal pain scores (VPS) were utilized to compare posttreatment scores to baseline scores. Chi-square and t tests were used to analyze the data.
Results: Across both groups, the mean ± standard deviation VPS score at the end of treatment (2.92 ± 3.2) was significantly lower compared to baseline (6.4 ± 1.75; P < .0001) and was a clinically meaningful (≥ 50%) difference. Initial VPS scores were similar in the AMI and NOR groups (6.27 ± 1.92 and 6.78 ± 1.98). At the end of the study, NOR patients reported a lower final VPS compared to AMI patients (2.83 ± 3.06 vs 4.55 ± 2.92; P = .039). The 50% improvement rate with NOR treatment was better than with AMI treatment (P = .036). The same maximal dosages were used by the patients who achieved a ≥ 50% success rate (20.96 ± 5.036 mg) than those who did not (21.667 ± 5.036 mg).
Conclusion: TCAs are effective in reducing pain in patients with chronic MFP. NOR seems more effective and better tolerated than AMI, but due to study limitations, more data are needed to confirm these results.
Keywords: amitriptyline, myalgia, myofascial pain, orofacial pain
Journal of Oral & Facial Pain and Headache, 4/2018
Pages 345-346, Language: English