Trigeminal Electrophysiology: a 2 × 2 matrix model for differential diagnosis between temporomandibular disorders and orofacial pain

Abstract

BackgroundPain due to temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) often has the same clinical symptoms and signs as other types of orofacial pain (OP). The possible presence of serious neurological and/or systemic organic pathologies makes differential diagnosis difficult, especially in early disease stages. In the present study, we performed a qualitative and quantitative electrophysiological evaluation of the neuromuscular responses of the trigeminal nervous system. Using the jaw jerk reflex (JJ) and the motor evoked potentials of the trigeminal roots (bR-MEPs) tests, we investigated the functional and organic responses of healthy subjects (control group) and patients with TMD symptoms (TMD group).MethodThirty-three patients with temporomandibular disorder (TMD) symptoms and 36 control subjects underwent two electromyographic (EMG) tests: the jaw jerk reflex test and the motor evoked potentials of the trigeminal roots test using bilateral electrical transcranial stimulation. The mean, standard deviation, median, minimum, and maximum values were computed for the EMG absolute values. The ratio between the EMG values obtained on each side was always computed with the reference side as the numerator. For the TMD group, this side was identified as the painful side (pain side), while for the control group this was taken as the non-preferred masticatory side (non-preferred side). The 5th, 10th, 25th, 50th, 75th, 90th, and 95th percentiles were also calculated.ResultsAnalysis of the ratios (expressed as percentages) between the values obtained on both sides revealed a high degree of symmetry in the bR-MEPs % in the control (0.93 ± 0.12%) and TMD (0.91 ± 0.22%) groups. This symmetry indicated organic integrity of the trigeminal root motor fibers and correct electrode arrangement.A degree of asymmetry of the jaw jerk's amplitude between sides (ipJJ%), when the mandible was kept in the intercuspal position, was found in the TMD group (0.24% ± 0.14%) with a statistically significant difference in relation to the control group (0.61% ± 0.2%). This asymmetry seemed to be primarily due to a failure to facilitate the reflex on the painful side in intercuspal position.ConclusionsIn this 2 × 2 matrix diagnostic model, three different types of headache may be identified: 1) those due to organic pathologies directly and indirectly involving the trigeminal nervous system denoted as "Organic Damage"; 2) those in TMD patients; 3) other types of orofacial pain in subjects who could erroneously be considered healthy, denoted as Orofacial Pain "OP". This category of patient should be considered at risk, as organic neurological pathologies could be present and yet not directly affect the trigeminal system, at least in the early stages of the disease.

A relationship between bruxism and orofacial-dystonia? A trigeminal electrophysiological approach in a case report of pineal cavernoma

“…The RDC should consider the patient as affected by a painful syndrome, and should tend towards the definition of a differential diagnosis between organic and/or functional pathologies [36]. …”

Musculoskeletal pain in older adults at the end-of-life: a systematic search and critical review of the literature with priorities for future research

“…Borgsteede et al [30] supported this by showing that musculoskeletal symptoms were prevalent in at least 20% of patient-GP encounters during the last three months of life. This is higher than the 14% annual prevalence of GP consultations for musculoskeletal disease in the general population reported by Jordan et al [33]. However, the studies were undertaken in different countries and used different systems for classifying consultation data making direct comparison difficult.…”

The Reliability of the Bilateral Trigeminal Roots-motor Evoked Potentials as an Organic Normalization Factor: Symmetry or Not Symmetry?

“…These differences in latency up to the maximal current density depend on the capacitive components of the tissues encountered by the intracranial current flow [25][26][27]. The signal saturation of the root is the first step to be performed, even before clinically interpreting a delay in latency [44][45][46][47].…”