Search

Background: Temporomandibular joint disorders (TMDs) encompass a range of clinical conditions affecting the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) and associated structures. Management approaches for TMDs vary and include both surgical and non-surgical interventions. Materials and Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, medical records of 150 patients diagnosed with TMDs were reviewed. Patients were categorized into two groups: surgical intervention and non-surgical intervention. The surgical group underwent various surgical procedures, including arthroscopy, arthroplasty, and joint replacement, while the non-surgical group received conservative treatments such as physical therapy, pharmacotherapy, and occlusal splints. Pain levels, TMJ function, quality of life (QoL), and patient satisfaction were assessed at baseline and post-treatment (6 months and 1 year). Results: At the 6-month follow-up, both groups experienced a significant reduction in pain scores (surgical group: 6.3 ± 1.2 to 2.4 ± 0.9, non-surgical group: 6.1 ± 1.1 to 3.2 ± 1.0). TMJ function improved in both groups (surgical group: 2.5 ± 0.8 to 4.8 ± 0.6, non-surgical group: 2.6 ± 0.7 to 4.2 ± 0.9). QoL scores increased (surgical group: 35.2 ± 4.6 to 50.3 ± 5.1, non-surgical group: 35.5 ± 4.2 to 45.7 ± 4.8), and patient satisfaction rates were high (surgical group: 92%, non-surgical group: 87%) at the 1-year follow-up. Conclusion: Both surgical and non-surgical management approaches demonstrated significant improvements in pain relief, TMJ function, QoL, and patient satisfaction for individuals with TMDs.

Background: The process of post-extraction socket healing is critical for ensuring proper tissue repair and minimizing complications in dental practice. Suturing techniques play a pivotal role in this process, influencing wound closure, hemostasis, and overall healing. Materials and Methods: This prospective clinical trial involved 80 participants who required single-tooth extractions. Patients were randomly assigned to four groups, each receiving a distinct suturing technique: simple interrupted sutures, horizontal mattress sutures, vertical mattress sutures, and continuous sutures. Standardized assessments, including clinical examination and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans, were performed at baseline, 1 week, and 4 weeks post-extraction. Wound dehiscence, soft tissue healing, and bone preservation were evaluated. Results: At 1-week post-extraction, the continuous suture group exhibited the lowest rate of wound dehiscence (5%) compared to other groups (simple interrupted, 15%; horizontal mattress, 10%; vertical mattress, 12%). Soft tissue healing scores at 4 weeks were significantly higher in the continuous suture group (8.7 ± 0.5) than in the other groups (simple interrupted, 7.2 ± 0.8; horizontal mattress, 7.8 ± 0.7; vertical mattress, 7.5 ± 0.6). CBCT analysis revealed superior bone preservation in the continuous suture group (98% remaining bone volume) compared to the other groups (simple interrupted, 92%; horizontal mattress, 95%; vertical mattress, 94%). Conclusion: This study demonstrates that the continuous suturing technique offers advantages in post-extraction socket healing, including reduced wound dehiscence, improved soft tissue healing, and better bone preservation.

Background: Smoking is a well-established risk factor for periodontitis, a chronic inflammatory disease of the oral cavity. While smoking cessation has been linked to improved overall health, its specific impact on periodontal health and gingival inflammation in individuals with periodontitis remains less explored. Materials and Methods: We conducted a prospective cohort study involving 200 smokers diagnosed with periodontitis. Participants were divided into two groups: Group A received comprehensive smoking cessation interventions, including counseling and pharmacotherapy, while group B continued smoking without intervention. Periodontal health was assessed through clinical parameters, including probing depth (PD) and clinical attachment level (CAL), at baseline and 6 months post intervention. Gingival inflammation was evaluated using the Gingival Index (GI). Results: After 6 months, group A exhibited a significant reduction in mean PD (from 4.5 mm to 3.2 mm) and CAL (from 5.0 mm to 3.5 mm) compared to group B. Conversely, group B showed no significant change in these parameters. The GI score significantly decreased in group A (from 2.8 to 1.2) but remained unchanged in group B. Furthermore, group A demonstrated a higher rate of smoking cessation (72%) compared to group B (14%). Conclusion: Smoking cessation interventions play a crucial role in improving periodontal health and reducing gingival inflammation in smokers with periodontitis. The observed reductions in PD, CAL, and gingival inflammation highlight the potential benefits of smoking cessation on oral health outcomes in this high-risk population.