Clinical outcome of arthrotomy after failed arthroscopy.
OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this article was to retrospectively examine patients who had undergone an arthrotomy after a previous arthroscopy had failed to relieve their symptoms.


METHODS
Nine patients who fulfilled these requirements and who were at least 6 months after their second surgery were retrospectively examined using a 16-item questionnaire and a craniomandibular index examination. They were asked to describe their perception of the frequency and intensity of temporomandibular joint, jaw, neck, and ear pain using visual analogy scales.


RESULTS
Five of the nine patients felt they were improved after the second surgery. The craniomandibular index examination did not prove to be a useful instrument in separating this group of patients. Visual analog scales showed clear differences between the two groups.


CONCLUSIONS
Although a number of patients were helped by the second operation, these data suggest caution in offering this option to patients.
Van Sickels
J E
JE
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio 78284.
Dolezal
J
J
D000328:Adult; D001182:Arthroscopy; D002358:Cartilage, Articular / Q000601:surgery*; D004032:Diet; D005157:Facial Pain / Q000503:physiopathology / Q000601:surgery; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D010147:Pain Measurement; D017060:Patient Satisfaction; D011379:Prognosis; D016059:Range of Motion, Articular; D012086:Reoperation; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D013704:Temporomandibular Joint / Q000601:surgery*; D013705:Temporomandibular Joint Disorders / Q000503:physiopathology / Q000601:surgery*; D016896:Treatment Outcome