-
International Journal of Paediatric... Jun 2024Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) is the most common rheumatic disease of childhood, and temporomandibular joints (TMJs) are involved in 39%-78% of patients. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) is the most common rheumatic disease of childhood, and temporomandibular joints (TMJs) are involved in 39%-78% of patients.
AIM
The aim of this systematic review was to assess the effectiveness of conservative approaches in improving TMJ arthritis in children and adolescents affected by JIA.
DESIGN
PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were systematically searched from the inception until February 25, 2024, to identify observational studies presenting participants with a diagnosis of JIA affecting the TMJ, rehabilitative approaches for TMJ arthritis as interventions, and clinical or radiological assessment of TMJ arthritis as outcome.
RESULTS
Of 478 papers suitable for title/abstract screening, 13 studies were included. The studies evaluated the effectiveness of intra-articular (IA) corticosteroid (CS) injections, IA infliximab injections, arthrocentesis alone or in combination with IACS injections, occlusal splint, functional appliance, and physiotherapy. The effectiveness of IACS injections was shown in eight studies. IA infliximab injections did not appear to significantly improve TMJ arthritis.
CONCLUSION
Results of this systematic review suggested that conservative treatments, especially IACS injections, might be effective in improving TMJ arthritis in patients affected by JIA. Further studies with a higher level of evidence and more representative samples should be conducted.
PubMed: 38863137
DOI: 10.1111/ipd.13225 -
International Journal of Oral and... May 2024Disc displacement without reduction (DDwoR) can cause pain and limitations in mouth opening, with a significant impact on function. The optimal management strategy for... (Review)
Review
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; I = 81%), and a significant improvement in MMO (SMD 0.79 mm, 95% CI 0.24-1.35 mm, P = 0.005; I = 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.
PubMed: 38702202
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2024.03.013 -
Cureus Mar 2024Temporomandibular disorder (TMD) is a multifaceted disorder impacting the temporomandibular joint (TMJ), causing substantial discomfort and functional limitations. This... (Review)
Review
Temporomandibular disorder (TMD) is a multifaceted disorder impacting the temporomandibular joint (TMJ), causing substantial discomfort and functional limitations. This systematic review aims to comprehensively assess the effectiveness of non-invasive treatment modalities for TMJ dysfunction, prioritizing a definitive protocol to ensure patient safety and enhance quality of life. Employing the PRISMA guidelines, we meticulously analyzed 20 studies from a pool of 1,417 articles sourced from databases such as PubMed, Google Scholar, ScienceDirect, and Medline. These studies underscore the multifarious nature of TMD and the varied responses to treatments such as physical therapy, laser therapy, ultrasound and electrical stimulation, splint therapy, injections, and arthrocentesis. Notably, the review highlights the paramount importance of precise diagnosis, often through surface electromyography, followed by a tailored treatment approach integrating manual therapy, counseling, and splint therapy. The systematic analysis revealed that while certain treatments such as transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and low-level laser therapy showed limited efficacy, combination therapies, especially those involving manual therapy, counseling, and splint therapy, demonstrated substantial improvement in reducing pain, depression, and anxiety. The findings advocate for a non-invasive, patient-centric approach, emphasizing education and symptom management before considering more invasive procedures such as injections and arthrocentesis. The review identifies the need for more comprehensive, longitudinal studies to establish a standardized, evidence-based treatment protocol for TMJ dysfunction, aiming to improve patient outcomes holistically.
PubMed: 38646388
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.56713 -
Journal of Maxillofacial and Oral... Apr 2024This systematic review aims to describe the clinical outcomes after TMJ arthroscopy followed by intra articular infiltration with different substances. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
This systematic review aims to describe the clinical outcomes after TMJ arthroscopy followed by intra articular infiltration with different substances.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A literature search was carried out, the variables were Arthroscopy with different substances, pain and maximal mouth opening. The inclusion criteria were articles that reported infiltration of different substances after arthroscopy. Case series, observational studies, and randomized clinical trials were included. Exclusion criteria were studies that included arthrocentesis, animal studies, connective tissue disease, patients with previous surgeries.
RESULTS
Of the 5 studies finally included, the population studied were 346 subjects, of which 315 were female. The mean age was 34.7 (16-77). Regarding diagnoses, Wilkes III and Wilkes IV were taken into account. The most commonly used substance was sodium hyaluronate/hyaluronic acid in 4 of the 5 studies.
CONCLUSION
Multiple substances have been infiltrated within the temporomandibular joint, with sodium hyaluronate/hyaluronic acid being the most studied. However, the benefit of substances like ATM artroscopia adyuvantes has not been clearly established. It is recommended in future studies that the substances and results be evaluated in the same way to obtain more homogeneous studies.
PubMed: 38601255
DOI: 10.1007/s12663-023-02047-7 -
Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) Mar 2024Temporomandibular joint disorders (TMDs) are prevalent musculoskeletal conditions involving pain and dysfunction of jaw mobility and function, which have proven... (Review)
Review
Does Liquid/Injectable Platelet-Rich Fibrin Help in the Arthrocentesis Treatment of Temporomandibular Joint Disorder Compared to Other Infusion Options? A Systematic Review of Randomized Clinical Trials.
Temporomandibular joint disorders (TMDs) are prevalent musculoskeletal conditions involving pain and dysfunction of jaw mobility and function, which have proven difficult to treat satisfactorily. The present study aimed to assess the effectiveness of a liquid platelet-rich fibrin (i-PRF) infusion during arthrocentesis versus other options using coadjuvant materials to reduce TMD symptoms. A literature search was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov for RCTs published before January 2024, comparing i-PRF to any other TMD treatment. This systematic review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023495364). The searches generated several recent RCTs that compared i-PRF injection combined with arthrocentesis (AC) to AC-only or AC with platelet-rich plasma (PRP). The outcomes analyzed included measures of pain (visual analog scale, VAS), maximum mouth opening, joint sounds, and MRI-verified changes in joint structure. Across the RCTs, the addition of i-PRF injection to AC resulted in significant improvements in pain relief, joint function, mouth opening, and structural changes compared to AC-only or with PRP over follow-up periods ranging from 6 to 12 months. Current clinical evidence favors using i-PRF as an adjunct to AC rather than AC-only or AC with PRP for the treatment of TMDs. The improvements in subjective and objective outcome measures are clinically meaningful. Still, additional high-quality RCTs with larger sample sizes and longer follow-ups are required to strengthen the evidence base and better define the role of i-PRF in TMD management guidelines.
PubMed: 38534521
DOI: 10.3390/bioengineering11030247 -
The Orthopedic Clinics of North America Apr 2024Septic arthritis of the wrist can have severe deleterious effects on cartilage and bone if not promptly addressed. Expedient diagnosis and early medical intervention are... (Review)
Review
Septic arthritis of the wrist can have severe deleterious effects on cartilage and bone if not promptly addressed. Expedient diagnosis and early medical intervention are important. The most effective strategy involves immediate arthrocentesis of the infected joint, enabling precise antibiotic selection based on joint fluid analysis. Diagnostic imaging is important in excluding fractures and identifying abscesses. This review explores the etiologic factors underlying septic wrist joint, identifying risk factors, and delineating optimal diagnosis and treatment approaches. The overarching goal is to impart valuable insights and guidance in the management of septic wrist joint, ensuring the highest quality patient care and optimal clinical outcomes.
Topics: Humans; Arthritis, Infectious; Debridement; Risk Factors; Wrist; Wrist Joint
PubMed: 38403373
DOI: 10.1016/j.ocl.2023.11.002 -
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 -
International Journal of Oral and... Jun 2024The aim of this systematic review was to assess the efficacy of arthroscopy compared to arthrocentesis and to conservative treatments for temporomandibular joint... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Arthroscopy versus arthrocentesis and versus conservative treatments for temporomandibular joint disorders: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.
The aim of this systematic review was to assess the efficacy of arthroscopy compared to arthrocentesis and to conservative treatments for temporomandibular joint disorders. Thirteen controlled studies on various patient outcomes were included after a systematic search in seven electronic databases. Meta-analyses were conducted separately for arthroscopic surgery (AS) and arthroscopic lysis and lavage (ALL), and short-term (<6 months), intermediate-term (6 months to 5 years), and long-term (≥5 years) follow-up periods were considered. No significant differences in pain reduction and complication rates were found between AS or ALL and arthrocentesis. Regarding improvement in maximum mouth opening (MMO), both AS at intermediate-term and ALL at short-term follow-up were equally efficient when compared to arthrocentesis. However, at intermediate-term follow-up, ALL was superior to arthrocentesis for MMO improvement (mean difference 4.9 mm, 95% confidence interval 2.7-7.1 mm). Trial sequential analysis supported the conclusion of the meta-analysis for MMO improvement for ALL versus arthrocentesis studies at intermediate-term follow-up, but not for the other meta-analyses. Insufficient evidence exists to draw conclusions regarding other patient outcomes or about comparisons between arthroscopy and conservative treatments. Due to the low quality of the primary studies, further research is warranted before final conclusions can be drawn regarding the management of temporomandibular joint disorders.
Topics: Humans; Arthroscopy; Temporomandibular Joint Disorders; Arthrocentesis; Conservative Treatment
PubMed: 38286713
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2024.01.006 -
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Dec 2023What is the comparative effectiveness of available therapies for chronic pain associated with temporomandibular disorders (TMD)? (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
CLINICAL QUESTION
What is the comparative effectiveness of available therapies for chronic pain associated with temporomandibular disorders (TMD)?
CURRENT PRACTICE
TMD are the second most common musculoskeletal chronic pain disorder after low back pain, affecting 6-9% of adults globally. TMD are associated with pain affecting the jaw and associated structures and may present with headaches, earache, clicking, popping, or crackling sounds in the temporomandibular joint, and impaired mandibular function. Current clinical practice guidelines are largely consensus-based and provide inconsistent recommendations.
RECOMMENDATIONS
For patients living with chronic pain (≥3 months) associated with TMD, and compared with placebo or sham procedures, the guideline panel issued: (1) strong recommendations in favour of cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) with or without biofeedback or relaxation therapy, therapist-assisted mobilisation, manual trigger point therapy, supervised postural exercise, supervised jaw exercise and stretching with or without manual trigger point therapy, and usual care (such as home exercises, stretching, reassurance, and education); (2) conditional recommendations in favour of manipulation, supervised jaw exercise with mobilisation, CBT with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDS), manipulation with postural exercise, and acupuncture; (3) conditional recommendations against reversible occlusal splints (alone or in combination with other interventions), arthrocentesis (alone or in combination with other interventions), cartilage supplement with or without hyaluronic acid injection, low level laser therapy (alone or in combination with other interventions), transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, gabapentin, botulinum toxin injection, hyaluronic acid injection, relaxation therapy, trigger point injection, acetaminophen (with or without muscle relaxants or NSAIDS), topical capsaicin, biofeedback, corticosteroid injection (with or without NSAIDS), benzodiazepines, and β blockers; and (4) strong recommendations against irreversible oral splints, discectomy, and NSAIDS with opioids.
HOW THIS GUIDELINE WAS CREATED
An international guideline development panel including patients, clinicians with content expertise, and methodologists produced these recommendations in adherence with standards for trustworthy guidelines using the GRADE approach. The MAGIC Evidence Ecosystem Foundation (MAGIC) provided methodological support. The panel approached the formulation of recommendations from the perspective of patients, rather than a population or health system perspective.
THE EVIDENCE
Recommendations are informed by a linked systematic review and network meta-analysis summarising the current body of evidence for benefits and harms of conservative, pharmacologic, and invasive interventions for chronic pain secondary to TMD.
UNDERSTANDING THE RECOMMENDATION
These recommendations apply to patients living with chronic pain (≥3 months duration) associated with TMD as a group of conditions, and do not apply to the management of acute TMD pain. When considering management options, clinicians and patients should first consider strongly recommended interventions, then those conditionally recommended in favour, then conditionally against. In doing so, shared decision making is essential to ensure patients make choices that reflect their values and preference, availability of interventions, and what they may have already tried. Further research is warranted and may alter recommendations in the future.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Chronic Pain; Hyaluronic Acid; Temporomandibular Joint Disorders
PubMed: 38101929
DOI: 10.1136/bmj-2023-076227 -
Journal of Stomatology, Oral and... Apr 2024We aimed to find out if there is any difference in outcomes with the use of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) or hyaluronic acid (HA) intra-articular injections after... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
We aimed to find out if there is any difference in outcomes with the use of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) or hyaluronic acid (HA) intra-articular injections after temporomandibular joint arthrocentesis.
METHODS
A systematic search of the electronic databases of PubMed, Embase, and Scopus was undertaken up to 5th May 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PRP with HA after TMJ arthrocentesis were included.
RESULTS
Seven RCTs were eligible. Pooled analysis failed to demonstrate any significant difference in MMO between PRP and HA groups at 1 month (MD: 0.21 95 % CI: -1.29, 1.70), 3 months (MD: 0.92 95 % CI: -2.96, 4.80), and 6 months (MD: -0.05 95 % CI: -2.08, 1.97). The inter-study heterogeneity was high with I values of 85 %, 98 %, and 81 % respectively. Similarly, there was no statistically significant difference in pain scores between the PRP and HA groups at 1 month (MD: 0.42 95 % CI: -2.25, 3.10), 3 months (MD: 0.90 95 % CI: -1.60, 3.41), and 6 months (MD: 0.06 95 % CI: -0.92, 1.04) with inter-study heterogeneity of 99 %, 99 %, and 92 % respectively.
CONCLUSION
Intra-articular use of PRP or HA after TMJ arthrocentesis may lead to comparable clinical outcomes. The current evidence is low-quality and fraught with high heterogeneity.
Topics: Humans; Hyaluronic Acid; Arthrocentesis; Treatment Outcome; Injections, Intra-Articular; Platelet-Rich Plasma
PubMed: 37923134
DOI: 10.1016/j.jormas.2023.101676