Arthrocentesis for temporomandibular joint disorders: a network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: Clinical studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of arthrocentesis in managing temporomandibular joint disorders (TMDs). However, there is a lack of consensus among these studies regarding the selection of injectables. Furthermore, an increasing number of drugs have been tested for TMDs in recent years, complicating the decision-making process for clinicians. This study conducted a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the clinical efficacy of different arthrocentesis treatment regimens. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive search of Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science to gather articles on RCTs pertaining to the management of TMDs using arthrocentesis. This search spanned from inception of these databases up to July 29, 2024. We then performed a network meta-analysis using Stata 17.0 software. The outcome indicators used were VAS scores and changes in unassisted maximum opening. To determine the efficacy of each regimen, we employed surface-under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) ranking. RESULT: Forty RCTs were included, encompassing 1904 temporomandibular joints (TMJs) cases. Treatment options encompass platelet-rich plasma (PRP), hyaluronic acid (HA), corticosteroids (CS), bone marrow concentrate (BMAC), injectable platelet-rich fibrin (i-PRF), concentrated growth factor (CGF), Tenoxicam (TX), microfragmented adipose tissue (FAT), and their combination regimens. The SUCRA ranking revealed that the most effective treatment options at 1-, 3-, and 6-months post-arthrocentesis were HA + PRP, i-PRF, and BMAC, respectively. CONCLUSION: HA + PRP, i-PRF and BMAC may represent the optimal arthrocentesis agents for the management of TMDs symptoms and restoration of TMJ function in the short, medium, and long term, respectively. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ , identifier CRD42024563975.

The feasibility and safety of ultrasound-guided puncture for treatment of septic arthritis in children.

BACKGROUND: In septic arthritis, joint lavage can be performed using arthrocentesis (articular needle aspiration) or arthrotomy. The use of fluoroscopy to guide the puncture involves radiation. Ultrasound (US) guidance is still little recommended to guide the treatment of septic arthritis in children. We wanted to know whether treating septic arthritis in children was feasible and safe under ultrasound (US) guidance. METHODS: We retrospectively included 67 children (mean age, 3.0 years; range: 1 month-12 years) treated for septic arthritis of the hip, shoulder, or ankle using arthrocentesis or arthrotomy under US or fluoroscopic guidance (non-US group) with at least two years of follow-up. RESULTS: We found no significant difference between the groups. After arthrocentesis, patients in the US group remained in hospital for 0.8 days longer than those in the non-US group, but the difference was not significant. After arthrotomy, the arthrotomy-US group required 0.4 more days of hospitalization than the non-US group, but the difference was not significant. Patients in the US group exhibited higher initial CRP and WBC values than patients treated without US, although the differences were not significant. The WBC values of the arthrocentesis-US groups were higher than those of the non-US groups initially and at 72 h, but non significantly so; they became similar on day 5. Three puncture failures required arthrotomy (two under US guidance). Three patients required early revision surgery: one had undergone arthrocentesis with US, one arthrocentesis without US, and one arthrotomy without US. At the last follow-up, there were no clinical sequelae but two hip arthrotomies (one US and one non-US child) showed asymptomatic calcifications. CONCLUSIONS: US guidance is feasible and safe for treating septic arthritis in children, visualizing structures not shown by X-rays and avoiding radiation exposure during surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV (case series). TRIAL REGISTRATION: IRB-MTP_2021_05_202100781.

Which of the autologous blood products administered simultaneously with arthrocentesis is more effective in terms of clinical outcomes?

This study aimed to determine which of the autologous blood products administered simultaneously with arthrocentesis is more effective on clinical outcomes in patients with temporomandibular joint disorder. The study included 116 patients who underwent arthrocentesis alone, i-PRF (injectable- Platelet Rich Fibrin) with arthrocentesis, and PRP (Platelet Rich Plasma) with arthrocentesis. A total of 35 patients underwent arthrocentesis (Group A), 47 patients underwent arthrocentesis with i-PRF (Group APRF) and 34 patients underwent arthrocentesis with PRP (Group APRP). All patients received local anaesthesia before the procedure, and then the upper joint cavity was irrigated with approximately 100 mL of saline solution. Subsequently, patients in Group APRF and Group APRP were administered 2 ml of autologous blood product. All patients' pain and maximum mouth opening values were compared statistically at each time point: before the procedure, 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after the procedure. The results demonstrated no significant difference among the groups in terms of pain. Nevertheless, in terms of maximum mouth opening, superior outcomes were observed in the early postoperative period in the PRP group, while superior outcomes were observed in the late postoperative period in the i-PRF group.

Retrospective analysis of ideal needle puncture angles and depths for temporomandibular joint arthrocentesis using CBCT data.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to investigate the range of angles and depths necessary for effective entry into the TMJ using CBCT images, focusing on classical Holmlund Hellsing points and a two-needle approach. METHODS: A retrospective cohort of CBCT images from January 2020 to November 2023 was analysed using 3D analysis to determine the variance in the required angles and depths. RESULTS: The average age of the 68 participants included in the study was 29.5 ± 11.1, 58.8% of the participants were female and 41.2% were male. The anterior needle measurements showed a relatively low standard deviation(SD) in depth(SD:3.6) with a low variance coefficient(12.5%), whereas the axial and coronal angles exhibited greater variability(SD:9.1 and 7.6, respectively). For the posterior needles, moderate SDs in depth(SD:3.5) and greater variabilities in axial and coronal angles(SD:9.6 and 5.3, respectively) were observed. A weak negative correlation was observed between the axial angle of the posterior needle and age(p: 0.028, Pearson r: -0.29) Anterior needle depth (p:0.037) and posterior needle axial angle(p:0.014) were greater in males than females. The anterior needle depth in patients with temporamandibular disease was greater than in those without(p:0,03). CONCLUSION: There were significant differences in the angle measurements for both anterior and posterior needles, but lower variance in depth. The depths and angles of the needles did not correlate with age.

Does intra-articular injection of platelet-rich plasma/platelet-rich fibrin improve outcomes after temporomandibular joint arthrocentesis? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) have been used as adjuncts to temporomandibular joint (TMJ) arthrocentesis but without any high-quality evidence. This systematic review collated data from published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to provide level-1 evidence on its efficacy. Trials published on the databases of PubMed, Scopus, Embase, CENTRAL, and Web of Science up to 4 August 2023 and comparing intra-articular PRP/PRF with control after TMJ arthrocentesis were eligible. Primary outcomes were pain and maximal mouth opening (MMO). Twelve RCTs were included. Pooled analysis showed that pain scores were significantly reduced with the use of PRP/PRF as compared with control at one month (MD: -0.96 95% CI: -1.58 to -0.35 I2 = 86%), three months (MD: -1.22 95% CI: -1.86 to -0.59 I2 = 85%), and ≥six months (MD: -1.61 95% CI: -2.22 to -1.00 I2 = 88%). Similarly, MMO was significantly improved in the PRP/PRF group at one month (MD: 2.40 95% CI: 1.02 to 3.77 I2 = 88%), three months (MD: 3.17 95% CI: 1.63 to 4.72 I2 = 91%), and ≥six months (MD: 2.98 95% CI: 1.86 to 4.10 I2 = 75%) as compared with the control group. Subgroup analysis for PRP and PRF failed to show any difference in outcomes. Moderate quality evidence suggests that PRP and PRF may significantly improve pain and MMO when used as adjuncts to TMJ arthrocentesis. Due to the small effect size, the clinical significance of the results is questionable. The high heterogeneity in PRP/PRF preparation methods is a significant limitation.

Optimising needle depth in temporomandibular joint arthrocentesis: a magnetic resonance-based study for safety and efficacy.

The aim of this paper was to determine the optimal needle depth for temporomandibular joint (TMJ) arthrocentesis using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), with the aim of improving procedural safety and efficacy in clinical practice. A retrospective analysis of 264 TMJ MRIs from 132 patients at Istanbul Medipol Mega University Hospital was conducted. T2-weighted MRI sequences were utilised to measure distances from skin to joint capsules at varying needle entry points, applying the double puncture technique. The study adhered to ethical standards with appropriate approvals. The analysis revealed significant gender-related variations in needle depths (females showing shorter distances than males, p < 0.05). No significant gender differences were found in condylar angles. An inverse correlation between age and condylar angle suggested age-related anatomical changes. Crucially, a 20 mm needle depth was identified as safer and more effective than the previously recommended 25 mm. This study underscores the necessity of revising needle depth to 20 mm in TMJ arthrocentesis. These findings hold significant implications for improving procedural safety and catering to demographic variations.

Evaluation of intra-articular injection of injectable platelet-rich fibrin, anterior repositioning splint and arthrocentesis in treatment of temporomandibular joint internal derangement.

The current research paper was designed to assess the impact of an intra-articular injection of injectable platelet-rich fibrin (I-PRF) following arthrocentesis and the use of an anterior repositioning splint (ARS) as a proposed treatment approach for addressing symptomatic internal derangement of the temporomandibular joint (TMJ). This study comprised thirty patients who presented with bilateral disc displacement without reduction. The patients were evenly distributed into two groups: Group I underwent treatment involving ARS and arthrocentesis alone, while Group II underwent treatment with ARS, arthrocentesis, and the injection of I-PRF. Clinical assessment of all patients was done postoperatively in the following intervals; first week, first month, third month, and six months for maximum mouth opening (MMO), right and left lateral excursion, and pain score. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) assessment for all joints was done at the sixth month postoperatively. Both groups demonstrated improvement in MMO, lateral excursion, and pain. Significant statistical differences were observed in the mean values of MMO and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), favouring the I-PRF group. MRI postoperatively showed no significant changes in disk position or morphology at the end of the sixth month. Administering an intra-articular I-PRF injection subsequent to arthrocentesis demonstrates effectiveness as a treatment approach for alleviating the signs and symptoms associated with internal derangement of the TMJ.

Comparison of outcomes with intra-articular hyaluronic acid vs corticosteroids after TMJ arthrocentesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This review aimed to examine differences in outcomes with the use of intra-articular hyaluronic acid vs corticosteroids after temporomandibular joint arthrocentesis. METHOD AND MATERIALS: Studies were searched on PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Google Scholar up to 15th January 2024. Randomized controlled trials comparing hyaluronic acid with corticosteroids after TMJ arthrocentesis were included. The outcomes were pain and maximal mouth opening. RESULTS: Ten articles corresponding to nine randomized clinical trials were included. There was no statistically significant difference in pain scores at 1 week (mean difference [MD] -0.30, 95% CI -1.25 to 0.65, I2 = 0%), 1 month (MD -0.55, 95% CI -1.23 to 0.13, I2 = 0%), and 6 months (MD -0.57, 95% CI -2.10 to 0.96, I2 = 58%) between the two groups. However, pain scores were found to be significantly lower in the hyaluronic acid group at 3 months (MD -1.07, 95% CI -1.84 to -0.31, I2 = 0%). No statistically significant difference was noted in maximal mouth opening at 1 week (MD 0.78, 95% CI -1.79 to 3.35, I2 = 0%), 1 month (MD 0.32, 95% CI -1.83 to 2.46, I2 = 0%), and 3 months (MD -0.41, 95% CI -3.90 to 3.07, I2 = 0%) between the two groups. Descriptive analysis for studies not included in the meta-analysis also presented similar results. CONCLUSIONS: Low-quality evidence suggests that both intra-articular hyaluronic acid and corticosteroids have similar efficacy in improving pain scores and maximal mouth opening after temporomandibular joint arthrocentesis.

The Short-Term Results of the Modified Concentric-Needle Technique for Single-Puncture Arthrocentesis: A Preliminary Study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the clinical applicability of the modified concentric cannula technique (CCT), focusing on the duration of the arthrocentesis, the number of reposition of cannula, and the occurrence of complications. STUDY DESIGN: Descriptive study. Place and Duration of the Study: Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Ankara Yildirim Beyazit University, Ankara, Turkiye, between September 2021 and May 2022. METHODOLOGY: Forty patients with Wilkes III temporomandibular joints (TMJ) internal derangement were identified and 13 patients who met the inclusion criteria were reviewed. The main outcomes regarding the clinical applicability of modified CCT included the duration of arthrocentesis, the number of reposition of cannula, and the occurrence of complications. RESULTS: The values of maximum mouth opening (MMO) without pain and MMO without assistance measured in the immediate postoperative period and at the 4th and 8th postoperative weeks were found to be significantly higher than the pre-arthrocentesis values. The values of MMO with assistance measured in the immediate postoperative period and at the 8th postoperative week were also significantly higher than the baseline values. Compared with preoperative values, notable decreases in pain scores were observed at the 4th (p = 0.003) and 8th (p = 0.002) postoperative weeks. The assessment of the jaw dysfunction also revealed significantly lower scores at the 4th (p = 0.024) and 8th (p <0.001) postoperative weeks. CONCLUSION: Modified CCT of arthrocentesis substantially decreased pain and improved mandibular functions in patients with internal derangement of TMJ. Additionally, this technique could be performed with a reduced number of cannula relocations and required a shorter operative time even with the use of a higher irrigation volume during the lavage procedure. KEY WORDS: Arthrocentesis, Temporomandibular joint disorder, Temporomandibular joint.

Arthrocentesis versus occlusal coverage splints in the management of disc displacement without reduction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Disc displacement without reduction (DDwoR) can cause pain and limitations in mouth opening, with a significant impact on function. The optimal management strategy for DDwoR is unclear. Treatments include conservative management such as mandibular manipulation, occlusal splints, and patient education/self-management, as well as arthrocentesis, which is a minimally invasive procedure. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to ascertain whether there is a role for arthrocentesis in the management of DDwoR. Studies analysing the outcomes pain and maximum mouth opening (MMO) in patients with DDwoR treated by arthrocentesis or occlusal coverage devices were eligible for inclusion. Following a database search, six studies with a total of 343 participants were found to be eligible for analysis (three prospective observational studies, one retrospective observational study, one non-randomized single-blind clinical trial, and one unblinded randomized clinical trial). When compared to occlusal coverage splints, arthrocentesis demonstrated a slight improvement in pain, although this was statistically non-significant (standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.04 to 0.05, P = 0.07; I2 = 81%), and a significant improvement in MMO (SMD 0.79 mm, 95% CI 0.24-1.35 mm, P = 0.005; I2 = 79%). However, due to the significant heterogeneity between studies and the high risk of bias, along with the paucity of double-blind randomized controlled clinical trials, definitive conclusions cannot be drawn for this clinical question.

[Minimally invasive treatments and open joint surgery for disorders of the temporomandibular joint]. / Minimaal invasieve behandelingen en opengewrichtschirurgie voor aandoeningen van het kaakgewricht.

The initial treatment of symptomatic disorders of the temporomandibular joint typically consists of a conservative approach, in which medication (painkillers and muscle relaxants), orofacial physiotherapy and splints are most important. In most cases, minimally invasive treatment options, such as arthrocentesis, arthroscopy or joint injections, are only considered when conservative methods provide insufficient symptom reduction. There is, however, an ongoing debate about the optimal treatment strategy due to an increasing body of evidence concerning the superior effectiveness in symptom reduction of minimally invasive treatment options with regard to conservative treatments. If these minimally invasive treatment options are also ineffective, open joint surgery may be considered as a last option for a select group of patients.

Comparative study of arthrocentesis with concentric-needle cannula with classic concentric needle: A randomized single-blind controlled clinical trial.

This study aimed to assess and compare the efficacy of two distinct single-puncture techniques in temporomandibular joint (TMJ) arthrocentesis for managing disk displacement without reduction (DDwoR). Sixty patients with DDwoR were randomly and blindly assigned to two treatment groups (n = 30 each): group 1 - TMJ arthrocentesis with the classic concentric needle; and group 2 - TMJ arthrocentesis with the concentric needle-cannula system. The following variables were recorded and compared across the groups: patient's pain perception (visual analog scale - VAS, 0-10); maximal interincisal distance (MID, mm); facial edema (FE, presence or absence); and operation duration (OP, minutes). Patients in group 2 presented significantly lower values of VAS score and presence of FE (p < 0.05) when examining the data at 24 and 48 h after the arthrocentesis. They also showed an increase in MID values (p = 0.024) after 6 months. With regard to OP, no significant difference was observed between the groups. Performing a single-puncture TMJ arthrocentesis using a concentric needle-cannula system significantly reduced the patients' pain perception, and mitigated the presence of facial edema during the immediate postoperative period (at 24 and 48 h). Furthermore, it resulted in a notable increase in the MID after 6 months.

Is there a superiority between arthrocentesis and stabilizing occlusal splint for the treatment of anterior disc displacement with reduction and intermittent block and anterior disc displacement without reduction in TMJ? Randomized clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: Anterior displacement of the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) disc is a disorder in which the articular disc is dislocated from its correct position relative to the mandibular condyle and mandibular fossa. Traditionally, the initial treatment of disc displacements involves various conservative measures, including the use of a stabilizing interocclusal splint. However, in cases where there is associated limited mouth opening, as in the case of anterior disc displacement with reduction and intermittent block (ADDwRIB), and anterior disc displacement without reduction (ADDw/oR), arthrocentesis has been suggested as another modality of initial treatment due to its faster effect in preventing disease progression to a more advanced stage, as well as reducing the chances of pain chronification and central sensitization. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to analyze whether there is a preponderance in efficacy between treatments with a stabilizing interocclusal splint or arthrocentesis in these patients. METHODS: A randomized, prospective, longitudinal clinical trial was conducted. The sample was obtained by convenience, between June 2021 and January 2023. Twenty-four patients with diagnoses of ADDwRIB and ADDw/oR were included. The diagnosis and clinical evaluations followed the DC/TMD criteria, and TMJ MRI was performed. Patients were randomly allocated to 2 treatment groups. Group 1 (n = 13): stabilizing interocclusal splint. Group 2 (n = 11): arthrocentesis. Patients were evaluated after 1, 2, 3, and 6 months for clinical parameters of pain, functionality, and psychosocial status. RESULTS: Both treatments were effective in reducing pain levels, with no statistically significant differences. Group 1 showed significantly greater mouth-opening levels compared to Group 2 (P = .041). CONCLUSION: Both groups showed significant improvements in various parameters evaluated throughout the study, indicating they are equally effective in pain control and most functional and quality of life parameters. However, the stabilizing interocclusal splint treatment was superior in restoring mouth opening.

Efficacy of Duloxetine With Arthrocentesis in the Management of TMJ Internal Derangement.

Temporomandibular joint (TMJ) arthrocentesis is one of the most commonly used non-invasive surgical interventions in the treatment of refractory pain and dysfunction associated with internal derangement. Several adjunctive therapies have been used in combination with arthrocentesis in an attempt to increase its efficacy and long-term maintenance. Duloxetine is a selective serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor which is used in different chronic pain conditions. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of duloxetine in combination with arthrocentesis compared with arthrocentesis alone. Twenty-eight patients with chronic TMJ pain were included and randomly allocated into 2 groups (control and study groups). The control group included patients who underwent TMJ arthrocentesis only, and the study group included patients who underwent arthrocentesis followed by giving duloxetine (30 mg) orally twice daily for 3 months. Pain, maximum mouth opening, and level of anxiety and depression were assessed preoperatively and followed at regular intervals of 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months postoperatively. Pain was significantly reduced in both groups at all postoperative intervals and was significantly lower in the study group than the control group at 6 months. Maximum mouth opening increased significantly in both groups, but the difference between them was not significant. Level of anxiety and depression was significantly decreased in both groups, with no statistically significant difference between them. The results of this study indicate that duloxetine in combination with arthrocentesis may provide effective and long-term pain control; however, its use is associated with a higher risk of adverse events.

Pressure Infusor Assisted Arthrocentesis.

Temporomandibular joint internal disorders commonly present with limited mouth opening and pain. Treatment options range from invasive surgical procedures to minimally invasive interventions. This technical note aims to introduce a modification to the arthrocentesis technique in which a pressure infusion cuff (VBM Classic Infusor, Medizintechnik GmbH, Germany) is used for irrigation instead of syringes or peristaltic pumps. A pressure infusion cuff (bag) is an inflatable bag with a hand pump and a sphygmomanometer that allows monitorization of the pressure, and it is intended to apply pressure on intravenous fluid bags to assist with rapid infusion of fluids. This allows the operator to maintain an efficient and stable flow pressure throughout the procedure while avoiding occupational hand and wrist problems resulting from manual irrigation with syringes. Furthermore, pressure monitoring, as read on the sphygmomanometer of the cuff, facilitates the manipulation of the needles and adjustment of the pressure should the patient experience discomfort. This increases the patient's compliance, physician's comfort, and allows the collection of quantitative data in clinical studies.

Is the modified double-puncture arthrocentesis technique effective in terms of clinical outcomes?

We aimed to compare the clinical results of the modified double-puncture arthrocentesis technique with the results of the conventional double-puncture and single-puncture techniques. Patients who underwent unilateral arthrocentesis and had stage 2-4 internal irregularities according to Wilkes classification were included in the study. The outcome variables were pain, maximum mouth opening, quality of life, and duration of the procedure. Data were analysed preoperatively and 1st-day, 1st-week, and 1st-month after the procedure. A total of 52 patients (49-females, 3-males) with complete records were included in this study. The mean age of the patients was 32.7 ± 15.6 years. There was no significant difference between the three techniques in terms of outcome variables at all times (p > 0.05). There was a significant difference between the single puncture technique and the other techniques in terms of procedure time (p < 0.05). No superiority of the modified double-puncture arthrocentesis was found in terms of clinical results.

Current thinking in open temporomandibular joint surgery. Is this still indicated in the management of articular temporomandibular joint disorder?

Management of temporomandibular disorders (TMD) follows a stepwise approach of conservative management, minimally invasive surgery (arthrocentesis and arthroscopy), open surgery and alloplastic replacement. The majority of patients treated in primary care and managed initially in secondary care have myofascial pain and can be managed conservatively with rest, topical NSAIDs, muscle massage, and a bite orthosis. Those who fail to improve and have articular related pain with limitation of function should initially undergo arthroscopic investigation and arthrocentesis, which is effective at resolving symptoms in 80% of patients. Arthroscopy provides the best diagnostic aid should there be a failure to improve and should enable the surgeon to appropriately plan open surgery. Historically, surgical intervention was based on a 'one size fits all' philosophy with the surgeon carrying out a procedure which they are used to doing regardless of the pathology. Prior to arthroscopy this carried an '80% chance of getting 80% better' regardless of approach. Prior arthroscopy reduced success rates to 50%-60% and a better success rate is needed. Basing surgical intervention on the pathology encountered is a sensible approach to joint management, with the surgeon performing surgery on the articular surfaces or disc as indicated. Having used this approach over the last 15 years the author has achieved success rates of 80% in the longer term and this philosophy, rationale, and technique will be discussed along with analysis of more recent publications in the field.

Evidence for minimally invasive treatment-A systematic review on surgical management of disc displacement.

BACKGROUND: Surgical treatment of temporomandibular joint (TMJ) disc displacement (DD) has been established in different forms since over a century. Ther is a consensus to perform minimal invasive interventions as first-line surgical treatment since there are no evidence on best surgical practice yet. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to perform a complex systematic review (SR) on the topic-is there evidence for surgical treatment of TMJ DD? METHODS: The PICO was defined as DD patients (population), treated with different surgical interventions including arthrocentesis (intervention), compared with other or no treatment (control) regarding the outcome variables mandibular function, mouth opening capacity, TMJ pain, etcetera (outcome). For identification of prospective controlled trials and SRs, a search strategy was developed for application in three databases. RESULTS: The search yielded 4931 studies of which 56 fulfilled the stipulated PICO. Studies with low or moderate risk of bias were possible to include in meta-analyses. There were evidence suggesting arthrocentesis being more effective compared to conservative management (maximum interincisal opening (MIO): p < .0001, I2 = 22%; TMJ pain: p = .0003, I2 = 84%) and arthrocentesis being slightly more effective than arthrocentesis with an adjunctive hyaluronic acid injection (MIO: p = .04, I2 = 0%; TMJ pain: p = .28, I2 = 0%). Other treatment comparisons showed nonsignificant differences. The performed meta-analyses only included 2-4 studies each, which might indicate a low grade of evidence. CONCLUSION: Although arthrocentesis performed better than conservative management the findings should be interpreted cautiously, and non-invasive management considered as primary measure. Still, several knowledge gaps concerning surgical methods of choice remains.

Treatment of painful temporomandibular joint disc displacement without reduction: network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

There is currently no consensus on the best treatment for painful temporomandibular disc displacement without reduction (DDwoR), and no network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing all types of treatments for this condition has been conducted. The objective of this study was to compare and rank all treatments for DDwoR, including conservative treatments, occlusal splints, low-level laser therapy (LLLT), arthrocentesis (Arthro) alone, Arthro plus intra-articular injection (IAI) of platelet-rich plasma (PRP), Arthro plus IAI of hyaluronic acid (HA), Arthro with exercises, Arthro plus occlusal splints, and manipulative therapy. Outcome variables were pain intensity on a visual analogue scale (VAS) and maximum mouth opening (MMO, mm). The mean difference with 95% confidence interval was estimated using Stata software. The GRADE system was used to assess the certainty of the evidence. A total of 742 patients from 16 RCTs were included in the NMA. Both direct meta-analysis and NMA showed that Arthro with IAI of co-adjuvants provided better pain reduction in the short term (≤3 months) than Arthro alone. However, the quality of the evidence was very low. In the intermediate term, Arthro alone or combined with co-adjuvants provided better pain reduction than conservative treatment, but with low-quality evidence. Conservative treatment significantly increased MMO in the short term compared to other treatments. In conclusion, the results of this NMA suggest that arthrocentesis with intra-articular injection of adjuvant medications may be superior to conservative treatments in reducing pain intensity at long-term follow-up, while no significant differences were found for the MMO outcome. However, the quality of evidence was generally low to very low, and further RCTs are needed to confirm these findings.

The Contemporary Management of Temporomandibular Joint Intra-Articular Pain and Dysfunction.

The understanding of the causes of temporomandibular joint pain and dysfunction has evolved over 50 years. Historically, the term internal derangement has been used to describe the abnormal relationship between the articular disc, condyle, and glenoid fossa, which was thought to correlate with patient symptoms. It is now known that the pathophysiology of intra-articular pain and dysfunction (IPD) involves synovitis, capsular impingement, symptomatic disc displacement, or a combination of these. Symptomatic disc displacement should only be considered to be a potential source of IPD after synovitis and capsular impingement have been treated. This philosophy provides the opportunity for most patients with IPD to be initially treated nonsurgically or with minimally invasive procedures such as arthrocentesis or arthroscopy.