Ineffective dental and surgical treatment associated with atypical facial pain

Neuralgia-inducing cavitational osteonecrosis - A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To assess the aetiologic factors, proposed diagnostic means and treatment strategies for neuralgia-inducing cavitational osteonecrosis.

METHODS

A search of the literature published up to June 2020 was conducted using Medline, the Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Web of Science. The scientific quality of the evidence was rated according to NIH Quality Assessment Tools.

RESULTS

4,051 articles were found, 59 were reviewed in full text, and 29 studies were included. With the exception of hereditary coagulopathies, which were identified as potential risk factors in five studies, suggestions concerning the aetiology varied widely. No gold standard diagnostic mean could be identified. Treatment was most often performed by surgical curettage of the affected bone. Surgical treatment outcomes were equally varied: significant facial pain remission was reported in 66%-100% for periods varying between 2 months to 18 years, whereas no or little relief and recurrences were reported in up to ⅓ of cases. All studies were observational in their design. All investigations were rated as poor quality because of high risk of bias and non-transparent reporting.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence concerning the aetiology, diagnosis and treatment of NICO is poor. Prospective diagnostic and therapeutic studies are needed before the usefulness of invasive therapeutic procedures can be evaluated.

Please spare my teeth! Dental procedures and trigeminal neuralgia

Background:

The correct diagnosis of trigeminal neuralgia (TN) is still a far cry and the patients suffer from unnecessary dental procedures before getting the definite treatment. In this study, we evaluated, if the patients have undergone dental procedures for their misdiagnosed TN before receiving definite treatment for the same.

Methods:

A total of 187 patients received GKRS for their TN (excluding secondary TN) in two institutes from 2010 to 2019. We did a retrospective analysis of these patients’ primary complaints on a standard questionnaire.

Results:

One hundred and seventeen of the 187 patients responded. About 55.5% of patients had a toothache and 65.8% did visit a dentist for the pain. About 41.8% of patients underwent one dental procedure; 18.8% suffered from worsening of the pain while 8.5% received some partial improvement. About 19.6% also underwent root canal treatment while 6.8% had a nerve block. Mean of 1.6 teeth was extracted per person. About 71% of patients were satisfied with their Gamma Knife radiosurgery for TN at a median follow-up of 49 months.

Conclusion:

There is a need for a better understanding of the disease among the dentists and the patients for the timely and correct treatment, without losing their teeth. The onus lies on neurosurgeons/neurologists disseminate knowledge regarding proper diagnosis and treatment modalities.

Persistent idiopathic facial pain – a prospective systematic study of clinical characteristics and neuroanatomical findings at 3.0 Tesla MRI

Introduction

Persistent idiopathic facial pain (PIFP) is a poorly understood chronic orofacial pain disorder and a differential diagnosis to trigeminal neuralgia. To address the lack of systematic studies in PIFP we here report clinical characteristics and neuroimaging findings in PIFP.

Methods

Data collection was prospective and standardized in consecutive PIFP patients. All patients underwent 3.0 MRI.

Results

In a cohort of 53 PIFP patients, the average age of onset was 44.1 years. PIFP was found in more women 40 (75%) than men 13 (25%), p < 0.001. There was a high prevalence of bilateral pain 7 (13%), hypoesthesia 23 (48%), depression 16 (30%) and other chronic pain conditions 17 (32%) and a low prevalence of stabbing pain 21 (40%), touch-evoked pain 14 (26%) and remission periods 10 (19%). The odds ratio between neurovascular contact and the painful side was 1.4 (95% Cl 0.4–4.4, p = 0.565) and the odds ratio between neurovascular contact with displacement of the trigeminal nerve and the painful side was 0.2 (95% Cl 0.0–2.1, p = 0.195).

Conclusion

PIFP is separated from trigeminal neuralgia both with respect to the clinical characteristics and neuroimaging findings, as NVC was not associated to PIFP.

Current evidence on atypical odontalgia: diagnosis and clinical management

Patients with atypical odontalgia (AO) complain of medically unexplained toothache. No evidence-based diagnostic criteria or treatment guidelines are yet available. The present paper addresses seven clinical questions about AO based on current knowledge in the literature and discusses diagnostic criteria and guidelines for treatment and management. The questions are (i) What is the prevalence of AO in the community? (ii) What psychological problems are experienced by patients with AO? (iii) Are there any comorbidities of AO? (iv) Is local anesthesia effective for the relief of pain in AO? (v) Are there any characteristic symptoms of AO other than spontaneous pain? (vi) Are antidepressants effective for treatment of AO? (vii) Are anticonvulsants effective for treatment of AO? Our literature search provided answers for these questions; however, there is insufficient evidence-based data to establish guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of AO. Overall, some diagnostic criteria for neuropathic pain and persistent dentoalveolar pain disorder may be applied to AO patients. The patient's psychogenic background should always be considered in the treatment and/or management of AO. The clinicians may need to treat AO patients using Patient-Oriented Evidence that Matters approach.

Ask the Experts: Ensuring accurate diagnosis of orofacial pain disorders

Dr Fricton received his BS and DDS degree from the University of Iowa (IA, USA), and then undertook his postgraduate studies, completing an MS in Oral Biology at UCLA School of Dentistry (University of California, CA, USA) and an Anesthesiology and Pain Management Residency at UCLA Medical Center. After research and clinical training at UCLA, he joined the faculty at the University of Minnesota (MN, USA), where he is currently a Professor in the Department of Diagnostic and Surgical Sciences and Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. He is also a Senior Research Investigator at HealthPartners Research Foundation (MN, USA). He has over 30 years experience in clinical care, research and teaching in the field of chronic pain, orofacial pain, temporomandibular muscle and joint disorders, muscle pain, and, more recently, health informatics. His sponsored research has focused on epidemiological studies and clinical trials of therapeutic strategies for chronic pain conditions. He has developed a biobehavioral framework for personalized care for chronic pain conditions and has integrated this pain research with studies of health information technology, focusing on the use of electronic health records, personal health records and clinical decision support to improve the outcomes and quality of healthcare. He is Principal Investigator for the NIH NIDCR’s temporomandibular joint (TMJ) Implant Registry and Repository, which includes research into the genetic, biomechanical and biobehavioral factors involved in the success or failure of TMJ implants. In addition, he has served on the governing board of the American Pain Society, and was president of both the American Board of Orofacial Pain and the American Academy of Orofacial Pain. He maintains an active private practice for patients with TMJ, orofacial, head and neck pain in Plymouth (MN, USA) and St Paul (MN, USA).

Improvement of chronic facial pain and facial dyskinesia with the help of botulinum toxin application

Background

Facial pain syndromes can be very heterogeneous and need individual diagnosis and treatment. This report describes an interesting case of facial pain associated with eczema and an isolated dyskinesia of the lower facial muscles following dental surgery. Different aspects of the pain, spasms and the eczema will be discussed.

Case presentation

In this patient, persistent intense pain arose in the lower part of her face following a dental operation. The patient also exhibited dyskinesia of her caudal mimic musculature that was triggered by specific movements. Several attempts at therapy had been unsuccessful. We performed local injections of botulinum toxin type A (BTX-A) into the affected region of the patient's face. Pain relief was immediate following each set of botulinum toxin injections. The follow up time amounts 62 weeks.

Conclusion

Botulinum toxin type A (BTX-A) can be a safe and effective therapy for certain forms of facial pain syndromes.

Algies faciales typiques et atypiques : du diagnostic au traitement

PURPOSE

Facial pain is a frequently encountered symptom in general medical practice and encompass a wide group of facial problems. As correct diagnosis can usually be reached by history and physical examination for well defined typical clinical entities (trigeminal neuralgia, cluster headache) atypical facial pain may have many other potential causes (sinuses infection, temporomandibular joint syndrome, dental disorders...) so that diagnosis not appear an easy task.

CURRENT KNOWLEDGE AND KEYPOINTS

Anatomical and physiological organization of facial nociceptive system, particularly trigeminal system, may explain the variability of facial pain. Although symptoms have been clearly identified mechanism of pain production remains controversial. Several factors (psychological, neurological, endocrine...) and mechanisms (neuropathic, vascular, myoarticular) may coexist and explain trouble in diagnosing and treating facial pain.

FUTURE PROSPECTS AND PROJECTS

Better knowledge in identifying the cause of facial pain may lead to improve patient care and avoid patient frustration, medical nomadism, repetitive dental and otolaryngologic procedures, and finally non-compliance with treatment.

Orofacial pain and sensory disorders in the elderly

Many orofacial pain conditions occur in the elderly. Specifically,this article reviews the prevalence of general and orofacial-related pain in the elderly. The authors also describe and discuss the likely disorders and diseases that produce facial pain and burning pain in the mouth. They do not cover jaw joint pain, oral sores, or ulceration-induced pain, as these conditions are better discussed in the context of arthritis and oral pathologies of the mouth. The authors discuss oral motor disorders, myogenous pain, vascular pain, headaches, trigeminal neuralgia, trigeminal neuropathic dis-ease, postherpetic neuralgia, burning mouth syndrome, and occlusal dysesthesia.

Atypical Odontalgia: A Review of the Literature

OBJECTIVE

To review previous reports of cases of atypical odontalgia to examine its epidemiological and clinical characteristics and to explore the etiology and pathophysiology of the disease.

BACKGROUND

Atypical odontalgia is one of many painful conditions that affect the oral cavity and is often overlooked in the differential diagnosis.

METHODS

A search of the literature was performed for all cases of atypical odontalgia reported from 1966 to the present.

RESULTS

The typical clinical presentation of atypical odontalgia that has been reported involves pain in a tooth in the absence of any sign of pathology; the pain may spread to areas of the face, neck, and shoulder. The existing literature suggests that this condition occurs in 3% to 6% of the patients who undergo endodontic treatment, with high female preponderance and a concentration of cases in the fourth decade of life. Deafferentation seems to be the most likely mechanism to initiate the pain, but psychological factors, alteration of neural mechanisms, and even an idiopathic mechanism have been implicated. Not all reported cases were preceded by trauma to the teeth or gums. The treatment of choice is a tricyclic antidepressant, alone or in combination with a phenothiazine. The outcome is usually fair, with many patients obtaining complete relief from pain. Especially in the absence of overt pathology, particular attention should be paid to avoiding any unnecessary and potentially dangerous dental intervention on the teeth.

CONCLUSION

Atypical odontalgia is surprisingly common, of uncertain origin, and potentially treatable.

Sensory and affective components of orofacial pain: is it all in your brain?

In this paper, we shall review several chronic orofacial pain conditions with emphasis on those that are essentially refractory to treatment. We shall present a review of current and past literature that describes the various pain phenomena as well as their underlying central mechanisms. New data concerning refractory pain will be used to underscore the importance of central processing of pain, with particular emphasis on neuropsychological and cognitive function and capacity that may play important roles in pain processing and maintenance of the pain state. Further, neurophysiological data showing that the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and other structures in the brain may play key roles in modulation of chronic pain will also be discussed. Although peripheral triggering events surely play an important role in initiating pain, the development of chronic and, in particular, refractory pain may depend on changes or malfunctions in the central nervous system. These changes may be quite subtle and require sophisticated approaches, such as functional MRI, to study them, as is now being done. New findings obtained therefore may lead to more rational and reliable treatment for orofacial pain.

Atypical orofacial pain disorders: a study of diagnostic subtypes

Atypical facial pain is a persistent pain in the face or intraoral region that does not fit into the diagnostic criteria associated with specific orofacial pain disorders. This article presents the results of a study, which showed that in most cases of presumed atypical facial pain, there is a specific physical diagnosis or multiple diagnoses that causes the persistent pain. These difficult to diagnose disorders are reviewed with discussion of future research that is needed in this area.

Cognitive-behavioral profiles among different categories of orofacial pain patients: diagnostic and treatment implications

Psychological homogeneity in temporomandibular disorders (TMD) is not conclusive. The multidimensional pain inventory (MPI) has previously identified 3 cognitive-behavioral profiles in TMD and chronic pain patients. Our aims were to replicate these findings in another cultural setting and relate the profiles to the diagnosis and to the treatment demand and outcome. The MPI was administered to 112 referrals comprising 6 categories of patients diagnosed with TMD or intractable orofacial pain. Dysfunctional profiles (high in pain and distress) were most common in patients with orofacial pain of obscure origin and more common in myofascial pain patients than in patients with other TMD diagnoses. Interpersonally-distressed profiles were found in all categories. Among patients with disk displacement, the 3rd profile (adaptive copers with low pain and distress and high control and activity) was most common in earlier successfully diskectomized patients and least common in those about to undergo invasive interventions. A dysfunctional profile was associated with treatment failure, conservative or surgical, and with the demand for radical therapy. Some support for a cyclical causality between pain and psychological factors was found. It is concluded that the robustness of the MPI as a relevant assessment instrument was further strengthened.

Management of chronic orofacial pain: attitudes among patients and dentists in a Swedish county

The purpose was to survey attitudes towards management of chronic orofacial pain (COP). Questionnaires were mailed to 30 randomized dentists and to 30 consecutive COP patients, examined 16 months earlier by a pain group of dental specialists. Fifty-seven per cent of the patients reported that their pain was the same as or worse than before and was disturbing. Few were dissatisfied with the examinations. Fifty-nine per cent thought that the consultations had been good. The surveyed dentists judged the most common causes of COP to be neurogenic and psychogenic in origin; they were overwhelmingly positive to the idea of a pain group (93%) and could consider referring patients (97%). Pain-inducing local diseases occurred but were not dominant among these COP patients. We concluded that management of COP in a pain group appears to be meaningful, as reflected by the respondents' attitudes but would gain by a closer collaboration with medical expertise.

Atypical facial pain: a double-blind placebo-controlled crossover pilot study of subcutaneous sumatriptan

A double-blind placebo-controlled crossover pilot study involving 19 patients was undertaken to evaluate the efficacy of subcutaneous sumatriptan, a selective 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT)-like receptor agonist, in the treatment of atypical facial pain (AFP). A reduction in total pain was found 120 min post injection in the sumatriptan group. Most patients, however, described the medication as ineffective overall, despite significant pain score reduction. The temporary improvement of pain scores with the active drug was thought to be too small to be of any clinical benefit, but suggests that vascular or neurogenic mechanisms may be involved in the aetiology of AFP. Sumatriptan is not an appropriate therapeutic option for patients with AFP, but could prove a valuable drug in experimental clinical pharmacology.

A double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover, study to evaluate the efficacy of subcutaneous sumatriptan in the treatment of atypical facial pain

A double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover study was undertaken to assess the efficacy and tolerability of sumatriptan in patients with atypical facial pain. Patients were aged 18-65 years and had at least a 6 months history of atypical facial pain. A total of 19 patients were recruited and assessed for pain scores (total, sensory and affective) by using a short form McGill pain questionnaire preinjection and and at 60 and 120 minutes after subcutaneous injection of sumatriptan (6 mg) or placebo. Safety and tolerability was assessed by recording adverse events during and after the injection. One patient received only one treatment since her pain symptoms resolved after the first treatment. Rest of the patients returned to the clinic 3-6 weeks later and received alternate treatment for atypical facial pain in the same fashion as on the first occasion. Treatment of patients with sumatriptan produced significant relief in sensory, affective and total pain at 120 minutes postinjection (P < .05). Sumatriptan failed to produce a significant reduction in sensory and total pain scores at 60 minutes following treatment, however the result was statistically significant for the affective pain score (P < .05). No death or other serious adverse events were reported. No patient was withdrawn from the study due to an adverse event. However, all the patients treated with sumatriptan experienced one or more adverse events. The most common reported adverse symptoms during the sumatriptan treatment period were injection site reactions, headache, feeling of heaviness, warm or hot sensation and disorders of mouth or tongue. However, most of these side effects were mild and transient. In conclusion, this study points towards some beneficial effect of a single subcutaneous injection of sumatriptan in the treatment of atypical facial pain. However, this data is not sufficient to suggest the clinical utility of subcutaneous sumatriptan (6 mg) for the management of atypical facial pain. Further studies are necessary to test the effects of prolonged subcutaneous and oral multiple dose administration of sumatriptan for the treatment of atypical facial pain.

Trigeminal neuralgia versus atypical facial pain. A review of the literature and case report

Trigeminal neuralgia and atypical facial pain are common conditions of facial pain. Although these two pain conditions are classically well separated in textbooks, a straightforward diagnosis may not always be possible because of the overlapping clinical signs and symptoms. In this article, a comparison and differentiation between the clinical and diagnostic features of these two pain conditions are presented. The general characteristics, etiologic characteristics, pathophysiology, differential diagnostic criteria, and therapeutic options of trigeminal neuralgia and atypical facial pain are described. A case report demonstrates the difficulties that can arise in the diagnosis and differentiation between the two disease entities. The article underscores the responsibility clinicians have in correctly diagnosing and managing patients with facial pain conditions.

Invasive dental treatment, pain reports, and disease conviction in chronic facial pain patients. A retrospective study

Patients with chronic orofacial pain often undergo endodontic therapy or surgery in an attempt to eliminate or relieve their symptoms. This study examined the relationship among invasive dental treatment, pain reports, and disease conviction in a group of patients referred for pain management. Forty-eight patients referred to the Facial Pain Diagnostic Group at the Karolinska Institute, School of Dentistry, Stockholm, were investigated retrospectively. There were 43 women and 5 men (age range, 30-81 years) with orofacial pain of more than 6 months' duration, which the patients considered to be of dental or paradental origin. Despite dental treatment intended to relieve the pain, no permanent relief had been achieved. There was no statistical correlation among the different pain reports, the individual types of treatment, and the disease conviction. The reason for the high degree of disease conviction in this type of patient warrants further investigation.

Atypical facial pain--application of the IHS criteria in a clinical sample

Atypical facial pain is a residual category for otherwise unclassifiable pain syndromes in the facial region. In 35 patients (31F, 4M) with a mean age of 53.2 +/- 14.9 years and a chronic facial pain syndrome we tested the new diagnostic criteria of the International Headache Society (IHS). There was a marked female preponderance, vague description of symptoms and a long history of incorrect diagnoses. A high number of invasive procedures (3.5 +/- 3.0 (1-13)) were performed in this group. In agreement with the IHS criteria, an operation or injury to the face was a suspected cause in 43%. In contrast to the IHS criteria, our patient sample had dysaesthesiae (63%), bilateral occurrence (37%), remission periods (57%), pain attacks (23%) and superficial as well as deep pain. The IHS classification is insufficient to separate atypical facial pain from other primary headache and facial pain syndromes. We suggest a modified version of the IHS criteria for atypical facial pain.

Is phantom tooth pain a deafferentation (neuropathic) syndrome? Part II: Psychosocial considerations

The symptoms of phantom tooth pain are often considered to be of psychological origin by those unfamiliar with its clinical characteristics. Part of the problem is that phantom tooth pain is often confused with atypical facial pain. Extensive literature exists for the latter that suggests a psychological cause. Many studies of atypical facial pain, however, suffer from one or more of four methodologic problems. In the present study, 115 phantom tooth pain cases are compared with a contrast group of 151 facial pain cases and 137 nonpain controls on a variety of personality characteristics. Only one trait personality factor, locus of control, statistically differentiates the three groups. The chief psychological difference of the phantom tooth pain sample compared with the control and contrast groups was higher scores on a measure of demoralization. Demoralization can be interpreted as a consequence as well as an antecedent of the chronic pain state. Evidence for each opinion is presented. Suggestions for obtaining informed consent of prospective endodontic patients are suggested. This study has not demonstrated that phantom tooth pain cases are characterized by a specific premorbid personality.

Is phantom tooth pain a deafferentation (neuropathic) syndrome? Part I: Evidence derived from pathophysiology and treatment

Phantom tooth pain is a syndrome of persistent pain or paresthesia in teeth and other oral tissues that may follow dental or surgical procedures such as pulp extirpation, apicoectomy, tooth extractions, or exenteration of the contents of the maxillary antrum. It can also occur when nerves are injured after trauma to the face or even after routine inferior alveolar nerve blocks if the needle pierces the nerve sheath. In the case of tooth extraction, the pain is found in the edentate area. After periodontal surgery, pain or paresthesia is located in the gingiva. The incidence of phantom tooth pain after extirpation may be as high as 3% of cases. Clinically, phantom tooth pain is similar in many essential characteristics to deafferentation pain syndromes also known as phantom pain syndromes. A limitation to this taxonomy is the lack of definitive information with respect to the pathophysiology of deafferentation pain in the trigeminal nerve. This article amplifies previous clinical descriptions of phantom tooth pain. Current concepts in the pathophysiology of neuropathic pain are reviewed as they pertain to phantom tooth pain. Treatments are described that use three routes of drug administration: oral, nerve blocks by injections, and intranasal applications. Reasons are discussed for the high rates of morbidity after dental and neurosurgery in attempts to treat phantom tooth pain.

Dental patients in a general pain clinic

Case histories of 15 patients with dental pain who were examined at the Royal Adelaide Hospital Pain Clinic were reviewed. These were the only patients with dental pain seen at the clinic over a 10-year period and represent less than 1% of the total patients fully examined at the clinic. Only one patient had an underlying organic problem; the remainder had a diagnosis of atypical facial pain. Common characteristics that pointed to the diagnosis of intractability were the duration of the pain, extensive and multiple ineffective treatments, a history of pain elsewhere in the body, and a history of psychologic disturbance. Ten of the 12 patients who were offered and accepted psychotherapeutic treatment had appreciable symptomatic relief. No dental or surgical treatments resulted in any pain relief.

Psychiatric disorders in orofacial dysaesthesia

70 patients with orofacial dysaesthesia were clinically examined at the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery of the University of Helsinki. All the patients were referred for a psychiatric consultation. Later 16 refused to attend. 12 of the 54 patients (22.2%) who took part in the psychiatric interview were psychotic, 27 patients (50.0%) had a moderate mental disorder and 11 patients (20.4%) a mild psychiatric disorder. 4 of the patients had no psychic diagnosis (psychically healthy). The control group, which comprised 44 patients referred to the Department for surgical extraction of an impacted tooth, filled in the Cornell Medical Index questionnaire. 3 of the controls (6.8%) had a severe mental disturbance, 5 (11.4%) a moderate psychic disorder and 4 (9.1%) a mild psychiatric disorder, whereas 32 patients (72.7%) were mentally healthy. The results show that there is a psychic background in most patients with chronic orofacial pain who have no clinical findings corresponding to the sensation of somatic pain.

Atypical facial pain: a retrospective study

Among the most challenging patients seen for evaluation by a health care practitioner are those suffering from the atypical facial pain syndrome. They have almost inevitably been subjected to extensive treatment which either has had no effect on the symptoms or has aggravated them. This article reports a retrospective study of thirty-four randomly selected cases of atypical facial pain that have been seen by a multidisciplinary pain group.

The psychiatric referral in dentistry: indications and mechanics

Psychiatric consultation is sometimes a part of the diagnostic evaluation of facial pain. The indications for referral arise out of the history. Several brief questions may indicate whether or not a psychiatric illness is present. Patients may hold beliefs or attitudes about their illness or about psychiatric treatment that make referral difficult. Successful referral depends on the relationship that the dentist establishes with the patient. Recommendations to facilitate the referral are presented.