Ki-Young Lee, Kyung Su Shin, Ji-Hye Jung, Hye-Won Cho, Kyung-Hwan Kwon, Yu-Lee Kim. JKAOMS 2020;46:133-42. https://doi.org/10.5125/jkaoms.2020.46.2.133

The application of botulinum in oral and maxillofacial surgery begins in 1982, where Jan Carruthers started using it for reducing the muscle mass and smoothing the skin, and since then it has been used for cosmetic purposes. In Korea, it is already being used by various specialties including dentistry (oral and maxillofacial surgery, oral medicine), plastic surgery, dermatology, ophthalmology, general surgery, and orthopedic surgery, etc. Each specialty approaches to Botox with its own medical indications. In this article, we will discuss the maxillofacial application of botulinum toxin, which includes theoretical and practical aspects of such as bruxism and square jaw.

Park WJ, et al. J Dent Anesth Pain Med. 2019 Aug;19(4):201-208. https://doi.org/10.17245/jdapm.2019.19.4.201

Botulinum toxin (BTX) has various therapeutic indications: bruxism, square jaw, facial wrinkle, oral ulcer and maxillofacial pain, etc. In this paper, we will discuss the effectiveness of using BTX in dental implant surgery and orthognathic and orthodontic treatment. We summarized the clinical application of botulinum toxin in the maxillofacial field at the finale.

Botulinum toxin (BTX) is used in various ways such as temporarily resolving muscular problems in musculoskeletal temporomandibular disorders, inducing a decrease in bruxism through a change in muscular patterns in a patient’s bruxism, and solving problems in patients with tension headache. And also, BTX is widely used in cosmetic applications for the treatment of facial wrinkles after local injection, but conditions such as temporomandibular joint disorders, headache, and neuropathic facial pain could be treated with this drug. In this report, we will discuss the clinical use of BTX for facial wrinkle, intraoral ulcer, and cranio-maxillofacial pain with previous studies and share our case.

The purpose of this study was to fabricate a biocompatible fluoride varnish with sustained fluoride release, and to compare it with commercial fluoride varnishes. For the experimental fluoride varnish, bis-GMA (BG) or two types of rosin (KR-610: K0, KR-612: K2) were used as bases. Either ethyl acetate or ethanol was added as solvent and 5 wt% NaF was used. 5 mg of experimental F- varnishes and 2 commercial products, Cavity shield (CS) and Flor-opal (FO), were applied on a labial surface of bovine teeth (10 mm × 7 mm). The amount of fluoride release was measured at 1 hr, 2 hrs, 3 hrs, 4 hrs, 8 hrs, 12 hrs, 1 day, 3 days, 5 days, 10 days, 15 days, 20 days and 30 days. MTT test was done with diluted F- varnishes using ethanol. Statistical analysis was done with one-way ANOVA and Duncan multiple range test (α=0.05). BG showed the highest fluoride release at 1 hr (P0.05), while that of K0 was highest at 2 hrs (P0.05). From 1 day to 5 days, experimental fluoride varnishes showed higher fluoride release than the commercial products (P0.05), and there were no significant differences after 5 days (P0.05). For MTT test, K0 and FO showed higher cell viability than other experimental groups (P0.05), with no significant differences with K2 (P0.05). Considering the sustained fluoride release and cell viability of the experimental rosin-based fluoride varnishes compared with commercial products, it will be appropriate for clinical application.