الفهرس 
IntroductionOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 90 |  |  |
| | | from | 90 | | |
Abstract
Over the last two decades, there have been significant advancements in TMJ arthroscopy. However, in an effort to better the results of therapy, clinical studies were conducted using a variety of extra surgical procedures. Injecting drugs like sodium hyaluronate and corticosteroids into the joint is one method, while others include introducing a second working cannula into the joint to facilitate surgical treatments on the internal joint components. Injection of PRGF in TMJ has recently drawn the attention of researchers because of its promising outcomes in controlling knee osteoarthritis. Maxillofacial surgeons have begun using PRGF as an adjunctive injectable material during arthroscopic procedures after reading publications praising the efficacy of PRGF factors over sodium hyaluronate in the management of knee joints.
This study aimed to evaluate the differences in pain ratings and biochemical analyses between TMJ arthroscopic surgery patients who received PRGF injections and those who received HA injections.
Selected among patients in the TMJ clinic in the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery department at Minia University Dental Hospital who were scheduled to undergo arthroscopic anterior disc release surgery, 12 participants were recruited in the research. The research participants were divided into two groups at random. Members of group (A) had a HA injection placed in the superior and inferior joint spaces at the conclusion of surgery, as well as two further injections placed at 2 and 4 weeks after the procedure. Patients in group (B) were given a PRGF injection in the superior joint space at the conclusion of surgery, as well as two further injections at 2 and 4 weeks after the procedure. Samples of synovial fluid were taken just before surgery and before every injection. Statistical analyses were performed on the data gathered from measuring and comparing TNF and IL-6 test levels across all samples. Preoperative, 2-week, 4-week, and subsequent 4-week intervals up to 16 weeks postoperative VAS pain data were obtained. Both sets of data were statistically analyzed and evaluated for differences in pain records.
At two weeks and one month, individuals who had received PRGF injections had much less pain relief than those who had received HA injections, as measured by VAS data. However, at longer intervals of follow-up, individuals who received PRGF injections showed a somewhat larger VAS change compared to those who received HA injections. Histochemical research showed that although TNF- levels were similar across all time points of follow-up, the shift in TNF- levels was considerably larger in patients who got PRGF injections than in those who received HA injections. The IL6 concentration remained constant during the course of the study. Patients who received PRGF injections had a slightly larger but statistically insignificant increase in IL-6 level than those who received HA injections.
Based on our findings, PRGF injection for reducing pain after arthroscopic treatment of temporomandibular disorders is recommended. Therefore, we encourage larger-scale trials to be conducted to demonstrate the efficacy of PRGF in relieving pain associated with suture problems.