-
Indian Journal of Otolaryngology and... Dec 2023The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy of double puncture arthrocentesis and anterior repositioning splints in the treatment of internal derangement of...
The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy of double puncture arthrocentesis and anterior repositioning splints in the treatment of internal derangement of temporomandibular joint. 35 patients with mean age of 36.6 years ± 10.2 years diagnosed with unilateral TMD who fell into Wilkes stage 2 and disc displacement with reduction with intermittent locking described by RDC/TMD were treated with Nitzan's double puncture arthrocentesis and were given a anterior repositioning hard splint. The parameters following parameters were assessed at intervals of 1 week, 2 weeks, 1 month, 3 months and 6 months: pain, maximum inter-incisal mouth opening, Joint noise/click. Statistically significant ( < 0.001) improvements were seen at all recorded intervals in all observed parameters. Simultaneous arthrocentesis and anterior repositioning splint therapy is effective in alleviating pain and improving mouth opening without discomfort in patients with unilateral painful TMD showing disc displacement with reduction with intermittent locking.
PubMed: 37974761
DOI: 10.1007/s12070-023-03890-3 -
Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral... Apr 2024Anterior displacement of the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) disc is a disorder in which the articular disc is dislocated from its correct position relative to the...
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.
PubMed: 38749875
DOI: 10.1016/j.oooo.2024.04.001 -
Journal of Maxillofacial and Oral... Dec 2023Tempormandibular Joint (TMJ) Disorders require early diagnosis with a prompt and effective treatment. Arthrocentesis has been found to be a valuable treatment aid for...
INTRODUCTION
Tempormandibular Joint (TMJ) Disorders require early diagnosis with a prompt and effective treatment. Arthrocentesis has been found to be a valuable treatment aid for patients with early stage internal derangement of temporomandibular joints. The use of this procedure has been well documented in literature and had been performed for decades. Arthrocentesis under local anaesthesia can be performed in two different techniques i.e Single puncture and Double puncture techniques.
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
Our study was done to show the effectiveness of each of these techniques in aiding the patient as well as time taken to perform this procedure. Our study compares the two techniques to allow us to draw a proper conclusion on which can be put to use for better and less traumatic treatment of these patients.
MATERIALS AND METHOD
For this study 50 patients with Internal Derangement, group A was 25 patients that were treated with Arthrocentesis of 200 ml RL using OnePrick TMJ Arthrocentesis System with Single Puncture technique and group B consisted of 25 patients who were treated with Arthrocentesis of 200 ml RL using Double Puncture technique.
RESULT
We found a significant increase in maximal mouth opening in patients undergoing arthrocentesis regardless of the technique. Comparison of mean duration of surgery performed among different groups were assessed using sample T test. Mean duration of technique A is around 17.18 minutes whereas for technique B is 20.90 minutes. The mean difference for two techniques performed is -3.722 with P value of 0.001. In technique A 24% of subjects needed additional lavage whereas in techniques B it is 20 %. On an average, total of 22 % of subjects needed additional lavage for better results. The resultant p value is around 0.733.
DISCUSSION
The traditional double puncture technique involves the insertion of two needles into the upper joint space. Difficulties in accurate triangulation, positioning of the needle, and frequent intraoperative needle dislocations lead to longer operating times and are often encountered with the double puncture technique. On comparing the two arthrocentesis techniques in terms of easiness to operator a study done showed the group treated with single needle techniques found it easier than the double needle technique. The difference between groups was significant. The mean difference for two techniques performed was seen to be above three minutes in our study which was statistically significant.
CONCLUSION
Single needle technique is advantageous in the fact that it takes a shorter duration to perform, is less invasive and easier for the operator to complete successfully.
PubMed: 38105816
DOI: 10.1007/s12663-023-01986-5 -
International Journal of Oral and... Jan 2024There is currently no consensus on the best treatment for painful temporomandibular disc displacement with reduction (DDwR), and no network meta-analysis of randomized... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
There is currently no consensus on the best treatment for painful temporomandibular disc displacement with reduction (DDwR), and no network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing all types of treatment for this condition has been conducted. The objective of this study was to compare and rank all treatments for DDwR, including conservative treatments, occlusal splints, low-level laser therapy (LLLT), manual therapy, no treatment (control), arthrocentesis (Arthro) alone, Arthro plus intra-articular injection of platelet-rich plasma (Arthro-PRP) or hyaluronic acid (Arthro-HA), and Arthro plus occlusal splint. Predictor variables were pain intensity and maximum mouth opening (MMO). The mean difference with 95% confidence interval was estimated using Stata software. The GRADE system was used to assess the certainty of the evidence. Twenty RCTs reporting 1107 patients were identified in the literature search; 980 of these patients were included in the network meta-analysis. Direct meta-analysis showed that Arthro-PRP significantly reduced pain intensity compared to Arthro alone, while occlusal splint and manual therapy were superior to conservative treatment (all very low quality evidence). Arthro with intra-articular injection of PRP/HA ranked as the most effective treatment in terms of pain reduction, whereas LLLT ranked the best choice for increasing MMO for patients with DDwR. However, it is important to note that the evidence for the superiority of these treatments is generally of very low quality. Therefore, further high-quality research is needed to confirm these findings and provide more reliable recommendations for the treatment of DDwR.
Topics: Humans; Temporomandibular Joint Disorders; Network Meta-Analysis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Pain; Arthrocentesis; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37802670
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2023.09.006 -
The American Journal of Emergency... Sep 2023Knee arthrocentesis can be performed by landmark (LM) or ultrasound (US) guidance. The goal of performing knee arthrocentesis is to obtain synovial fluid, however, it is... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
OBJECTIVE
Knee arthrocentesis can be performed by landmark (LM) or ultrasound (US) guidance. The goal of performing knee arthrocentesis is to obtain synovial fluid, however, it is also important to consider the number of attempts required and accidental bone contacts that occur. This study evaluates procedural success without bone contact in knee arthrocentesis and compares both LM and US guided techniques in a cadaver model.
METHODS
This was a randomized crossover study comparing US vs LM guidance for arthrocentesis in a single academic center. Volunteers were randomized to perform both LM and US guided knee arthrocentesis on cadavers. The primary outcome was procedural success, defined as first attempt aspiration of synovial fluid without bone contact. Secondary outcomes included number of attempts, number of bone contacts, time to aspiration, and confidence.
RESULTS
Sixty-one participants completed the study with a total of 122 procedures performed. Procedural success without bone contact was greater in the US group (84% vs 64% p = 0.02). Time to aspiration was longer for US (38.75 s vs 25.54 s p = 0.004). Participants were more confident with US compared to LM both before the procedure on a Visual Analog Scale from 1 to 100 (29 vs 21 p = 0.03) as well as after the procedure (83 vs 69 p = 0.0001). Participants had a greater median increase in confidence with US following training (44 vs 26 p = 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS
Study participants had greater procedural success without bone contact when US guidance was used. The increase in confidence following training was greater for US guidance than the LM method. Use of US guidance may offer a benefit by allowing for better needle control and avoidance of sensitive structures for clinicians performing knee arthrocentesis.
Topics: Humans; Arthrocentesis; Cross-Over Studies; Ultrasonography; Knee Joint; Cadaver; Ultrasonography, Interventional
PubMed: 37406477
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajem.2023.06.044 -
Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial... Oct 2023Arthrocentesis is a minimally invasive procedure with reported efficacy when used for lysis and lavage of the joint for symptomatic internal derangement, irrespective of... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
Arthrocentesis is a minimally invasive procedure with reported efficacy when used for lysis and lavage of the joint for symptomatic internal derangement, irrespective of the technique utilized.
PURPOSE
The purpose of the study was to determine if the single puncture arthrocentesis (SPA) is superior to double puncture arthrocentesis (DPA) with respect to pain reduction and improved maximal mouth opening (MMO) for subjects with acute disc displacement without reduction.
STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING
A single-blinded randomized prospective clinical trial was conducted at the tertiary referral center for temporomandibular joint disorders. All subjects were diagnosed with acute onset disc displacement without reduction based on history and magnetic resonance imaging findings. Subjects were randomized to SPA or DPA.
PREDICTOR VARIABLE(S)
The primary predictor variable was arthrocentesis technique (SPA vs DPA).
MAIN OUTCOME VARIABLE(S)
The primary outcome variables were pain and MMO, measured at 4 weeks. The duration for the procedure was recorded at the time of the surgery.
COVARIATES
Age, sex, and the side affected were recorded.
ANALYSES
Data were analyzed using analysis of variance to compare the primary outcome variables. Levene's, post hoc, and Bonferroni-Holm tests were used for intergroup comparisons with a P value of <0.05 being significant.
RESULTS
Forty subjects completed the study. The mean age for the SPA and DPA groups was 28.3 (±3.9) and 29.1 (±4.1), respectively (P = .52). The sex distribution was 60 and 55% female in the SPA and DPA groups, respectively. The mean pain reduction in the SPA and DPA groups was from 8.30 (±0.86) to 0.90 (±0.78) and from 8.00 (±0.79) to 0.95 (±0.82), respectively (P < .0001). There was no difference in pain reduction between the groups (P = .05). The mean increase in MMO was 34.6 (±2.34) and 33.4 (±2.35) in the SPA and DPA groups, respectively (P < .0001). The difference between the groups was not significant (P = .12). The procedural time in the SPA and DPA groups was 14.15 ± 1.72 and 17.55 ± 1.66, respectively (P < .0001).
CONCLUSION
SPA and DPA arthrocentesis appear to be equally efficacious for pain reduction and increasing MMO. SPA can be completed in less time than DPA and should be considered as a viable alternative to the conventional DPA technique.
Topics: Humans; Female; Male; Arthrocentesis; Prospective Studies; Treatment Outcome; Punctures; Pain; Range of Motion, Articular; Temporomandibular Joint
PubMed: 37573887
DOI: 10.1016/j.joms.2023.07.140 -
International Journal of Oral and... Aug 2023The aim of this study was to determine whether arthrocentesis is superior to conservative treatment in the management of painful temporomandibular joint disorders with... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The aim of this study was to determine whether arthrocentesis is superior to conservative treatment in the management of painful temporomandibular joint disorders with restricted opening. A systematic review was undertaken of prospective randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing arthrocentesis to conservative management, identified in the MEDLINE and PubMed databases. Inclusion criteria included a 6-month follow-up, with clinical assessment of the patients and painful restricted mouth opening. Data extracted included pain measured on a visual analogue scale and maximum mouth opening measured in millimetres. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2 for RCTs, and a meta-analysis with the random-effects model was undertaken. Of 879 records retrieved, seven met the inclusion criteria; these RCTs reported the results at 6 months for 448 patients. One study had a low risk of bias, four studies had an uncertain risk, and two had a high risk of bias. In the meta-analysis, arthrocentesis was statistically superior to conservative management at 6 months for an increase in maximum mouth opening (1.12 mm, 95% confidence interval 0.45-1.78 mm; P = 0.001; I = 87%) and borderline superior for pain reduction (-1.09 cm, 95% confidence interval -2.19 to 0.01 cm; P = 0.05; I = 100%). However, these differences are unlikely to be clinically relevant.
Topics: Humans; Arthrocentesis; Conservative Treatment; Treatment Outcome; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Temporomandibular Joint Disorders; Pain; Temporomandibular Joint; Range of Motion, Articular
PubMed: 36732095
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2022.12.005 -
Journal of Stomatology, Oral and... Oct 2023Disc displacement without reduction (DDWoR) of the temporomandibular joint is associated with limited mouth opening and arthralgia. In the natural course of the...
Evaluation of the effects of arthrocentesis combined with occlusal stabilization splint on disc displacement without reduction-induced acute and closed lock. A prospective cohort study.
OBJECTIVE
Disc displacement without reduction (DDWoR) of the temporomandibular joint is associated with limited mouth opening and arthralgia. In the natural course of the disorder, there is a tendency to progress to degenerative joint diseases. First-line treatment aims to reduce pain and restore joint function. The current study aims to examine the efficacy of an occlusal stabilization splint applied simultaneously with arthrocentesis as first-line treatment in acute and chronic closed-locks.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The present prospective clinical trial included 40 patients who were diagnosed with DDWoR induced chronic (Group 1, n = 23) and acute (Group 2, n = 17) closed-locks. All participants underwent single session arthrocentesis and were applied occlusal stabilization splints. Maximum mouth opening amounts (MMO), Visual analogue scale (VAS), and McGill pain questionnaire (MPQ) scores were evaluated at baseline, on the operation day, and on seven days after the intervention. The obtained data was analyzed with the Wilcoxon signed-rank, Mann-Whitney U, Fisher's exact, Spearman's correlation tests.
RESULTS
According to the baseline data, a significant increase was observed in the amount of MMO in postoperative measurements (p = 0.001 and p < 0.001). A statistically significant decrease in MPQ scores was observed in the postoperative period (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001). While a significant difference was observed between the postoperative VAS scores, the scores of Group 2 were lower (p = 0.018).
CONCLUSION
Although combined arthrocentesis and occlusal stabilization splint provided significant changes for acute and chronic closed-locks in line with first-line treatment goals, acute closed-lock with arthralgia responded better.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER
NCT05671549.
Topics: Humans; Arthralgia; Arthrocentesis; Prospective Studies; Range of Motion, Articular; Splints; Temporomandibular Joint Disorders; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 36918123
DOI: 10.1016/j.jormas.2023.101438 -
Journal of Oral Rehabilitation Jun 2024Surgical treatment of temporomandibular joint (TMJ) disc displacement (DD) has been established in different forms since over a century. Ther is a consensus to perform... (Review)
Review
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, I = 22%; TMJ pain: p = .0003, I = 84%) and arthrocentesis being slightly more effective than arthrocentesis with an adjunctive hyaluronic acid injection (MIO: p = .04, I = 0%; TMJ pain: p = .28, I = 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.
Topics: Humans; Temporomandibular Joint Disorders; Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures; Joint Dislocations; Temporomandibular Joint Disc; Treatment Outcome; Arthrocentesis; Range of Motion, Articular; Hyaluronic Acid; Injections, Intra-Articular
PubMed: 38400536
DOI: 10.1111/joor.13661 -
Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial... Jun 2024The understanding of the causes of temporomandibular joint pain and dysfunction has evolved over 50 years. Historically, the term internal derangement has been used to... (Review)
Review
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.
Topics: Humans; Temporomandibular Joint Disorders; Arthroscopy; Facial Pain; Arthralgia; Arthrocentesis
PubMed: 38280727
DOI: 10.1016/j.joms.2024.01.003