Temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) are multi-factorial and polysymptomatic pathologies and their management must be customized for every patient. Numerous therapy techniques are available to treat temporomandibular disorders-related muscular discomfort and persistent orofacial pain. Botulinum toxin (BoNT) has emerged as a popular option for patients with myofascial TMD who do not completely recover from their condition after receiving conservative care and medication. A systematic search of the literature, from January 2000 until 1 April 2022, was performed in the MEDLINE (PubMed), Web of Science, and Lilacs databases. The following search terms combination: (temporomandibular disorders) OR (botulinum) OR (toxin) was employed. A total of 357 articles were initially found in the electronic search. After screening, 11 full-text articles satisfied the inclusion criteria. The Cochrane risk of bias tool (RoB 2) tool, which uses seven domains of bias to assess random sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding of participants and personnel, blinding of outcome assessment of self-reported outcomes, blinding of outcome assessment of objective measures, incomplete outcome data, selective reporting, and other biases, was employed to analyze randomized controlled trials. The aim of this systematic review of randomized controlled trials is to provide an overview of the use of BoNT for TMDs by comparing the application of BoNT with other therapeutic approaches. BoNT-A could help patients that do not respond to conservative treatments. Low doses are recommended when BoNT-A is considered for persistent orofacial pain related to TMD. Future research should, however, conduct clinical trials with a stricter design. The results of BoNT-A could be confirmed by more randomized controlled trials with larger sample sizes, less bias, and longer follow-up times.

Temporomandibular disorders are a group of conditions affecting the temporomandibular joints, the jaw muscles, and related structures. Patients with temporomandibular signs and/or symptoms frequently present with indications for prosthetic treatment. The management of these patients aims to achieve patient comfort, occlusal stability, and the complex restoration of the teeth. The goal of this review is to provide an overview of the relationship between prosthodontics and temporomandibular disorders and/or bruxism with a focus on the cause-and-effect implications and the strategies for planning prosthetic treatments in patients with temporomandibular disorders and/or bruxism.

Background: Implant-supported overdentures offer enhanced mechanical properties, which lead to better patient satisfaction and survival rates than conventional dentures. However, it is unclear whether these satisfaction levels and survival rates depend on the number of implants supporting the overdenture. Therefore, this systematic review aimed to compare maxillary overdentures supported by four or six splinted implants in terms of patient satisfaction, implant survival, overdenture survival, and prosthodontic complications. Methods: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (PubMed), and EMBASE databases were systematically searched and complemented by hand searching from 2000 to 2019, employing a combination of specific keywords. Studies comparing the use of four versus six implants for supporting overdentures with at least one-year of follow-up after prosthesis installation and including ten fully edentulous patients were included. The risk of bias (RoB) was analyzed with Cochrane’s RoB 2 and Newcastle–Ottawa tools. Implants and prosthesis survival rates were analyzed by random-effects meta-analysis and expressed as risk ratios or risk differences, respectively, and by the non-parametric unpaired Fisher’s test. Results: A total of 15 from 1865 articles were included, and reported follow-up times after implant placement ranged from 1 to 10 years. Irrespective of the number of implants used, high scores were reported by all studies investigating patient satisfaction. Meta-analysis and non-parametric Fisher’s test showed no statistical differences regarding the survival rate of implants (P = 0.34, P = 0.3) or overdentures (P = 0.74, P = 0.9) when using 4 versus 6 splinted implants to support overdentures, and no significant differences regarding prosthodontic complications were found between groups. Randomized studies presented high RoB and non-randomized studies presented acceptable quality. Conclusions: Within the limits of this systematic review, we can conclude that the bar-supported overdenture on four implants is not inferior to the overdenture supported by six implants for rehabilitating the edentulous maxilla, in terms of patient satisfaction, survival rates of implants and overdentures, and prosthodontic complications.

(1) Background: Prosthetically-driven implant positioning is a prerequisite for long-term successful treatment. Transferring the planned implant position information to the clinical setting could be done using either static or dynamic guided techniques. The 3D model of the bone and surrounding structures is obtained via cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and the patient’s oral condition can be acquired conventionally and then digitalized using a desktop scanner, partially digital workflow (PDW) or digitally with the aid of an intraoral scanner (FDW). The aim of the present randomized clinical trial (RCT) was to compare the accuracy of flapless dental implants insertion in partially edentulous patients with a static surgical template obtained through PDW and FDW. Patient outcome and time spent from data collection to template manufacturing were also compared. (2) Methods: 66 partially edentulous sites (at 49 patients) were randomly assigned to a PDW or FDW for guided implant insertion. Planned and placed implants position were compared by assessing four deviation parameters: 3D error at the entry point, 3D error at the apex, angular deviation, and vertical deviation at entry point. (3) Results: A total of 111 implants were inserted. No implant loss during osseointegration or mechanical and technical complications occurred during the first-year post-implants loading. The mean error at the entry point was 0.44 mm (FDW) and 0.85 (PDW), p ≤ 0.00; at implant apex, 1.03 (FDW) and 1.48 (PDW), p ≤ 0.00; the mean angular deviation, 2.12° (FDW) and 2.48° (PDW), p = 0.03 and the mean depth deviation, 0.45 mm (FDW) and 0.68 mm (PDW), p ≤ 0.00; (4) Conclusions: Despite the statistically significant differences between the groups, and in the limits of the present study, full digital workflow as well as partially digital workflow are predictable methods for accurate prosthetically driven guided implants insertion.

Third molar removal surgery usually comes accompanied by postoperative discomfort, which could be influenced by the surgical approach chosen. This scoping systematic review aimed at compiling the available evidence focused on the influence of flap design, including envelope flap (EF), triangular flap (TF), and modified triangular flap (MTF), on postoperative pain, swelling, and trismus, as primary outcome measures, and any result mentioning healing promotion or delay, as secondary outcome measure, after mandibular third molar extraction surgery. An electronic search, complemented by a manual search, of articles published from 1999 to 2020 was conducted in the Medline (PubMed), EMBASE and Web of Science databases including human randomized controlled trials, prospective, and retrospective studies with at least 15 patients. The risk of bias of the included studies was assessed either with the Cochrane's Risk of Bias tool or with the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Every step of the review was performed independently and in duplicate. The initial electronic search recovered 2102 articles. After applying the inclusion criteria, 12 articles were included. For patient's perceived postoperative pain, TF and MTF frequently reported better results than EF. For swelling, the literature is divided, despite a trend favoring EF. For trismus, data showed that its occurrence is mostly associated with the duration of the surgery rather than with the chosen flap. For healing, the limited data is inconclusive. Finally, randomized studies showed a high risk of bias, whereas nonrandomized studies were mostly of good quality and low risk of bias. Although there was no clear consensus regarding the influence of different flap designs for third mandibular molar extraction on postoperative clinical morbidities; the surgeon's experience, estimated surgical difficulty, molar position and orientation, and surg ery duration should be considered when choosing among the different flap designs.

Objective: The aim of this study is to perform a qualitative and quantitative analysis of the scientific literature regarding the use of acupuncture and laser acupuncture in the treatment of pain associated with temporomandibular disorders (TMDs). The aim of this article was to assess the clinical evidence for acupuncture and laser acupuncture therapies as treatment for temporomandibular joint disorder (TMD). Materials and methods: This systematic review includes randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of acupuncture and laser acupuncture as a treatment for TMD compared to other treatments. Systematic searches were conducted in 3 electronic databases up to July 2023; PubMed, EMBASE, and SCOPUS databases. All RCTs of acupuncture for TMD were searched without language restrictions. Studies in which no clinical data and complex interventions were excluded. The Cochrane risk of bias tool (RoB 2) tool was employed to analyze randomized controlled trials. A Meta-analysis was performed in order to investigate a quantitative analysis comparing acupuncture and laser acupuncture to placebo. Results: A total of 11 RCTs met our inclusion criteria. The findings show that acupuncture is short-term helpful for reducing the severity of TMD pain with muscle origin. Meta-analysis revealed that the Acupuncture group and Laser Acupuncture group had a higher efficacy rate than the Placebo control group, showing a high efficacy of Acupuncture and Laser Acupuncture group in the treatment of temporomandibular. Conclusions: In conclusion, our systematic review demonstrate that the evidence for acupuncture as a symptomatic treatment of TMD is limited. Further rigorous studies are, however, required to establish beyond doubt whether acupuncture has therapeutic value for this indication. However high efficacy of Laser Acupuncture in the treatment of temporomandibular disorders was reported.