Does Injection of Corticosteroid After Arthrocentesis Improve Outcomes of Temporomandibular Joint Osteoarthritis? A Randomized Clinical Trial

Custo-Efetividade de Diferentes Tratamentos Minimamente Invasivos Para Disfunção Temporomandibular de Origem Articular sob a Perspectiva do Sistema Público de Saúde Brasileiro

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness (CE) of minimally invasive interventions for pain associated with articular temporomandibular dysfunction from the Brazilian Public Health System (SUS) perspective.

METHODS

This is a CE study with a 1-year time horizon. Effectiveness data were extracted from a network meta-analysis, and 2 treatments with moderate levels of evidence certainty were evaluated: arthrocentesis (ARTRO) plus intra-articular corticosteroid (CO) injection and ARTRO plus intra-articular injection of sodium hyaluronate (SH). For CE analysis, the costs of 2 types of SH (low and high molecular weight) and 4 COs (betamethasone [B], dexamethasone acetate [D], methylprednisolone sodium succinate [M], or triamcinolone hexacetonide [T]) were considered. Modeling was conducted using TreeAge Pro Healthcare software, with the construction of a decision tree representing a hypothetical cohort of adults with articular temporomandibular dysfunction. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. In addition, an acceptability curve was developed.

RESULTS

The total costs per joint for ARTRO plus low- and high-molecular-weight SH and ARTRO plus COs B, D, M, and T were, respectively, R$583.32, R$763.85, R$164.39, R$133.93, R$138.57, and R$159.86. ARTRO plus dexamethasone acetate was considered cost-effective, with lower cost and higher net monetary benefit than other technologies. In all sensitivity analysis scenarios, it remained cost-effective. It also showed greater acceptability.

CONCLUSION

ARTRO plus dexamethasone acetate was considered the cost-effective technology, exhibiting higher net monetary benefit and higher acceptability from the SUS perspective.

Corticosteroids for the Treatment of Internal Temporomandibular Joint Disorders: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Background: We evaluated the comparative effectiveness of all intra-articular injection corticosteroids for treating internal temporomandibular joint (TMJ) disorders. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, CENTRAL, EMBASE, SCOPUS, and LILACS through December 2023. We included randomized clinical trials (RCTs) enrolling patients with symptomatic internal disorders of the TMJ comparing any type of intra-articular corticosteroid therapy against another or to another minimally invasive therapy. The outcomes of interest were pain, range of mandibular motion (RoM), quality of life (QoL) and adverse effects at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool. We conducted a frequentist network meta-analysis and assessed the certainty of the evidence (CoE) using GRADE. Results: We included 20 RCTs enrolling 810 participants, which assessed five corticosteroids alone or combined with arthrocentesis or hyaluronic acid. Based on moderate CoE, betamethasone is among the most effective corticosteroids for reducing pain at one (mean difference compared to arthrocentesis [MD], -3.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], -4.55 to -3.05) and three months (MD, -2.74; 95%CI, -3.42 to -2.06), and arthrocentesis plus dexamethasone at six months (MD, -0.80; 95%CI, -1.57 to -0.03). There was no convincing evidence that any intervention was better than arthrocentesis for improving the RoM and QoL at any follow-up time. Methylprednisolone may be more harmful than arthrocentesis for adverse effects. Discussion: Betamethasone and arthrocentesis plus dexamethasone are the most effective in managing pain in the short and medium term compared to arthrocentesis (moderate CoE). Decisions about their use should consider other factors, such as costs, feasibility, and acceptability. Future research should consider QoL as an outcome and assess participants at longer follow-up periods.

Consensus Report and Recommendations on the Management of Late-stage Internal Derangement of the Temporomandibular Joint

Introduction: This report investigates late-stage internal derangement (ID) of the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) with the aim of establishing a more effective and personalized treatment protocol to improve patients' quality of life (QoL). Material and methods: A consensus was reached among maxillofacial surgeons specializing in LSID, based on a literature research and collective expert experience following the Delphi method. Consensus was considered to be achieved when a response received at least 80% of votes. Results: Four expert groups were established, respectively, focusing on diagnosis, minimally invasive surgery (MIS), open surgery and joint replacement. A comprehensive approach to late-stage ID of the TMJ requires a consensus report. This underscores the need for a personalized treatment plan, considering the variability in clinical presentations and progression of this pathology. Our recommendations aim to optimize clinical outcomes and enhance patient QoL.

Hyaluronic Acid and Platelet-Rich Plasma Mixture Versus Hyaluronic Acid and Corticosteroid in the Treatment of Temporomandibular Joint Internal Derangement: A Comparative Randomized Study

Objectives

This study aimed to compare the effects of different intra-articular injections using a mixture of hyaluronic acid (HA) and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) versus hyaluronic acid and corticosteroid in the management of TMJ internal derangement with reduction.

Materials and Methods

Sixty patients were randomly divided into two equal groups. Group I was injected with hyaluronic acid and PRP, while group II was injected with hyaluronic acid and corticosteroid. Pain intensity according to the visual analogue scale, maximum inter-incisal opening (MIO), lateral movement, and joint sound were measured pre-operatively and at 1 week, 1 month, and 6 months post-operatively.

Results

MIO and lateral movements were improved in both groups, with a reduction in the number of patients suffering from clicking sounds along the follow-up periods with no significant difference between the studied groups. However, regarding pain, the group injected with HA and PRP achieved the best results after 6 months, while patients treated with HA and corticosteroids obtained the best results at the end of the 1st week.

Conclusion

Hyaluronic acid and platelet-rich plasma mixture performed better than hyaluronic acid and corticosteroid in the treatment of TMJ internal derangement with reduction at the long-term follow-up regarding pain intensity.

Temporomandibular joint arthrocentesis: a single-center experience and review of the literature

BACKGROUND

The aim of this paper was to report our experience and to review the literature of arthrocentesis focusing on protocols and results.

METHODS

Arthrocentesis with supplemental hyaluronic acid was performed in patients with TMDs between January 2017 and December 2020 at the Division of Maxillofacial Surgery. The maximum interincisal opening (MIO) and pain score were recorded preoperatively (T0), 2 months postoperatively (T1), and 6 months postoperatively (T2). A literature search was performed to analyze the same parameters in patients with TMDs. Patient demographic, characteristics and treatment protocols used were also recorded.

RESULTS

This retrospective analysis enrolled 45 patients. Twenty-two patients (20 females, 2 males) with mean age of 37.13 years with internal derangement were included in study group A. Study group B included 23 patients with degenerative joint disease (19 females and 4 males) with mean age of 55.73 years. The outcomes trend of MIO and pain during the follow-up period showed a gradual improvement. Fifty articles meeting the proposed scientific criteria were selected for the literature revision. A range of clinical and procedural variables were analyzed by grouping the studies into two broad categories based on the diagnosis of TMD.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on our experience and on the basis of the most accredited scientific studies in the literature, intra-articular injections of HA are beneficial for the improvement of the pain and/or functional symptoms of TMDs.

Does intra-articular injection of tenoxicam after arthrocentesis heal outcomes of temporomandibular joint osteoarthritis? A randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Temporomandibular joint osteoarthritis (TMJ-OA) is a degenerative disease and manifests itself with pain and limitation of movement in the jaws. Arthrocentesis alone or in combination with intraarticular injections is one of the most commonly used treatment methods in these patients. The aim of the study is to examine the effectiveness of arthrocentesis plus tenoxicam injection and to compare it with arthrocentesis alone in patients with TMJ-OA.

METHODS

Thirty patients with TMJ-OA who were treated randomly with either arthrocentesis plus tenoxicam injection (TX group) or arthrocentesis alone (control group) were examined. Maximum mouth opening (MMO), visual analog scale (VAS) pain values, and joint sounds were the outcome variables, which were evaluated at pre-treatment and at 1, 4, 12, and 24 weeks after treatment. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.

RESULTS

The gender distribution and mean age were not significantly different between the two groups. Pain values (p < 0.001), MMO (p < 0.001), and joint sounds (p < 0.001) improved significantly in both groups. However, there was no significant difference between the groups in terms of outcome variables [pain (p = 0.085), MMO (p = 0.174), joint sounds (p = 0.131)].

CONCLUSIONS

Arthrocentesis plus tenoxicam injection showed no better outcomes in terms of MMO, pain, and joint sounds compared with arthrocentesis alone in patients with TMJ-OA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Injection of Tenoxicam Versus Arthrocentesis Alone in the Treatment of Temporomandibular Joint Osteoarthritis, NCT05497570. Registered 11 May 2022. Retrospectively registered, https://register.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov/prs/app/action/SelectProtocol?sid=S000CD7A&selectaction=Edit&uid=U0006FC4&ts=6&cx=f3anuq.

Assessment of postoperative pain in patients undergoing temporomandibular joint arthroscopy with infiltration of dexamethasone disodium phosphate in different concentrations. A randomized controlled trial

The main aim of this work was to evaluate the effect of intra-articular, sub-synovial steroid injections (IASSSI) with different doses during temporomandibular joint (TMJ) arthroscopy. Using a single-blind, randomized clinical trial, the investigators enrolled a sample of subjects who underwent TMJ arthroscopy with vs. without IASSSI for treating TMJ disorder (TMD). The predictor variable was the treatment group classified as no treatment (A - without IASSSI) or active treatments (IASSSI (B) with 2 mg or (C) 4-mg dexamethasone). Study medications were randomly assigned. Only subjects were blinded to treatment assignment. The main outcome variables included the following: 1) pain assessed up to postoperative day 30 with the McGill Pain Questionnaire and visual analog scale (VAS); 2) maximum mouth opening (MMO); and 3) analgesic and anti-inflammatory drug consumption. Other variables were demographic (age, sex) or pathologic (disease manifestations and classifications). Descriptive and bivariate statistics were computed. Statistical significance was set at p ≤ 0.5, one-tailed test of hypothesis. The sample comprised 36 patients (n = 12 per study group). In the active group with 4 mg corticosteroids, pain reduction measured by VAS (odds ratio [OR] = 0.18; p = 0.013) and McGill scale scores (OR = 0.15; p = 0.048) was significantly higher than in the control group. The McGill scale scores significantly decreased in both IASSSI groups, compared to the control group, at the final follow-up (all p < 0.012), and IASSSI was significantly associated with reduced analgesic consumption at postoperative days 7 and 14 (p = 0.003). However, there was no significant difference regarding MMO among the three groups. Within the limitations of the study, it seems that intra-articular, sub-synovial steroid injections (IASSSI) with 4 mg dexamethasone should be preferred whenever appropriate when pain relief is the priority of the procedure. Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials (ReBec)- 28yb2g.

Lavage Volume of Arthrocentesis in the Management of Temporomandibular Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The aim of this study was to investigate the most effective lavage volume of arthrocentesis in the management of temporomandibular disorders. A comprehensive electronic search, based on the PRISMA guidelines, was performed, which included a computer search with specific keywords, a reference list search and a manual search. The inclusion criteria were the following: a randomized controlled trial, at least 20 subjects who underwent arthrocentesis, mention of the irrigation materials used for the arthrocentesis, mention of the irrigation volumes used for the arthrocentesis, MMO and pain measured as VAS or NRS, were reported as outcome figures, mention of a specific diagnosis or signs and symptoms, and inclusion of the data on the MMO or VAS/NRS at 6-month follow-up. Sixteen publications were enrolled in the meta-analysis, comparing arthrocentesis with a lavage volume <150 mL and arthrocentesis with a lavage volume ≥150 mL, in the efficacy of the improvement in the mouth opening and pain reduction. The results revealed the group with a lavage volume <150 mL had a greater improvement in the mouth opening and pain reduction. However, results are to be interpreted with caution, due to the paucity of the randomized controlled literature and other confounding factors. Further high-quality studies are required to provide a better conclusion to the treatment outcomes of the different lavage volumes.

EFFECTIVENESS OF INTRA-ARTICULAR INJECTIONS OF SODIUM HYALURONATE, CORTICOSTEROIDS, PLATELET-RICH PLASMA ON TEMPOROMANDIBULAR JOINT OSTEOARTHRITIS: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND NETWORK META-ANALYSIS OF RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of Intra-articular injections of corticosteroids (CCS), hyaluronic acid (HA), and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) on temporomandibular joint osteoarthritis.

METHODS

Studies were identified from PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov with date up to January 15, 2022. Randomized controlled trials included were the studies of patients with temporomandibular joint osteoarthritis who had intra-articular treatment with CCS, HA, PRP, placebo and follow-up assessing temporomandibular joint function in target outcome variables. The primary outcome was temporomandibular joint pain. The secondary outcomes were maximal mouth opening (mm), and lateral movement to the affected side (mm). This study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42021270914.

RESULTS

Nine randomized controlled trials involving 316 patients were included. For primary pain outcome, no significance was detected when CCS, HA and PRP were compared with placebo by both short- (3-6 months) and long-term (>12 months) follow-up. Relatively, the top ranking of which was PRP in the long-term (Mean Difference, -0.23 [95% CI, -2.49 to 2.04]). In addition, these injectables did not significantly outperform placebo by evaluating secondary functional outcomes (maximal mouth opening and lateral movement) with the same follow-up. Subgroup analyses showed that the effect of CCS on subgroups with more than 70% women was statistically less effective compared with placebo (Mean Difference, 1.73 [95% CI, 0.37-3.09]).

CONCLUSION

Evidence suggested that intra-articular pharmacological injections of CCS, HA, and PRP had no effect on improving temporomandibular joint pain and functional outcomes compared with placebo injection.

Injectable platelet-rich fibrin as treatment for temporomandibular joint osteoarthritis: A randomized controlled clinical trial

The purpose of this study was to assess the treatment outcomes of intraarticular injection of injectable platelet-rich fibrin (i-PRF) after arthrocentesis in patients with temporomandibular joint osteoarthritis (TMJ-OA). Patients were randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups: those who received intraarticular injection of i-PRF after arthrocentesis procedure - the i-PRF group; and those who underwent the arthrocentesis procedure alone - the control group. The primary outcome variable was pain, the level of which was measured preoperatively and at 1, 2, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. The secondary outcome variables included maximum mouth opening (MMO), and lateral and protrusive movements. Of the total of 36 patients, 18 were analyzed in the i-PRF group and 18 in the control group. There were significant differences between the groups in terms of pain levels and measurements of MMO, lateral movement, and protrusive movement over the 12 months of follow-up (p < 0.001). Significant increases in pain levels and decreases in measurements of MMO, lateral movement, and protrusive movement were observed in the control group from the 6th to 12th month postoperatively (p < 0.001). In contrast, no significant differences were found in both pain levels and measurements of MMO, lateral, and protrusive movements for the i-PRF group from the 2nd to the 12th month postoperatively. Within the limitations of the study it seems that intraarticular injection of i-PRF after arthrocentesis should be preferred whenever appropriate because when reducing pain intensity and improving functional jaw movement is the priority.

Treatment of Mandibular Hypomobility by Injections into the Temporomandibular Joints: A Systematic Review of the Substances Used

INTRODUCTION

Hyaluronic acid, steroids and blood products are popularly injected into the temporomandibular joint (TMJs) to relieve pain and increase the extent of mandibular abduction. The purpose of this review is to identify other injectable substances and to evaluate them in the above-mentioned domains.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The review included articles describing clinical trials of patients treated with intra-articular injections with or without arthrocentesis.

RESULTS

The following emerging substances were initially evaluated to be effective in treating TMJ pain and increasing the amplitude of mandibular abduction: analgesics, dextrose with lidocaine, adipose tissue, nucleated bone marrow cells and ozone gas.

DISCUSSION

Better effects of intra-articular administration are achieved by preceding the injection with arthrocentesis.

CONCLUSIONS

The most promising substances appear to be bone marrow and adipose tissue.

Mechanisms of Action and Efficacy of Hyaluronic Acid, Corticosteroids and Platelet-Rich Plasma in the Treatment of Temporomandibular Joint Osteoarthritis-A Systematic Review

Temporomandibular joint osteoarthritis (TMJ OA) is a low-inflammatory disorder with multifactorial etiology. The aim of this review was to present the current state of knowledge regarding the mechanisms of action and the efficacy of hyaluronic acid (HA), corticosteroids (CS) and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in the treatment of TMJ OA.: The PubMed database was analyzed with the keywords: "(temporomandibular joint) AND ((osteoarthritis) OR (dysfunction) OR (disorders) OR (pain)) AND ((treatment) OR (arthrocentesis) OR (arthroscopy) OR (injection)) AND ((hyaluronic acid) OR (corticosteroid) OR (platelet rich plasma))". After screening of 363 results, 16 studies were included in this review. Arthrocentesis alone effectively reduces pain and improves jaw function in patients diagnosed with TMJ OA. Additional injections of HA, either low-molecular-weight (LMW) HA or high-molecular-weight (HMW) HA, or CS at the end of the arthrocentesis do not improve the final clinical outcomes. CS present several negative effects on the articular cartilage. Results related to additional PRP injections are not consistent and are rather questionable. Further studies should be multicenter, based on a larger group of patients and should answer the question of whether other methods of TMJ OA treatment are more beneficial for the patients than simple arthrocentesis.

Is there a difference in treatment effect of different intra-articular drugs for temporomandibular joint osteoarthritis? A systematic review of randomized controlled trials

A systematic review based on the PRISMA guidelines was conducted to investigate and compare treatment with hyaluronic acid (HA), corticosteroids, and blood products in patients with temporomandibular joint osteoarthritis (TMJOA). The MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for articles published until September 25, 2019. Articles met the inclusion criteria if they reported patients with TMJOA, a comparison group, and a follow-up period of at least 6 months. The mean and standard deviation for TMJ pain and maximum mouth opening (MMO) were reported. Nine studies involving 443 patients were included. Injectables and Ringer's lactate solution or normal saline were reported to significantly improve TMJ pain and MMO. Regarding TMJ pain, two studies showed a significant superiority of plasma rich in growth factors (PRGF)/platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections with or without arthrocentesis over HA, but HA showed a significant improvement compared to corticosteroids. For MMO, no injectable was found to be superior to Ringer's lactate or a normal saline control, but arthrocentesis + PRP resulted in MMO improvement compared to arthrocentesis + HA. Overall, all injectables in conjunction with arthrocentesis were efficient in alleviating pain and improving MMO in TMJOA patients; however, a meta-analysis was not possible due to heterogeneity across studies.

Does glucosamine, chondroitin sulfate, and methylsulfonylmethane supplementation improve the outcome of temporomandibular joint osteoarthritis management with arthrocentesis plus intraarticular hyaluronic acid injection. A randomized clinical trial

The purpose of this study was to compare clinical outcomes obtained with the use of glucosamine, chondroitin sulfate, and methylsulfonylmethane (GCM) supplementation after arthrocentesis plus intraarticular hyaluronic acid (HA) injection. A randomized clinical trial was implemented with adult participants with TMJ-OA who were referred to the author's clinic between February 2014 and May 2015. The sample was entirely composed of patients with TMJ-OA who were treated randomly with a one-session arthrocentesis plus intraarticular HA injection only (control group), or an initial one-session arthrocentesis plus intraarticular HA injection followed by 3 months of GCM supplementation (study group). The predictor variable was management (treatment) technique. The outcome variables were visual analog scale evaluations (masticatory efficiency, pain complaint, joint sound) and mandibular mobility (maximal interincisal opening [MIO], and lateral and protrusive motions of the mandible). The outcome variables were recorded preoperatively and 12 months postoperatively. Thirty-one participants were enrolled in the study. Five were lost during follow-up. The final study sample consisted of 26 participants (age 28.35 ± 10.85 y): 14 in the control group (age 28.71 ± 10.94 y); and 12 in the study group (age 27.92 ± 11.20 y). Pain complaints (p < 0.001) and joint sounds (p = 0.030 for the control group; p = 0.023 for the study group) showed statistically significant decreases. Masticatory efficiency (p < 0.001 for the control group; p = 0.040 for the study group) and lateral mandibular motion (p = 0.040 for the control group; p = 0.004 for study group) showed statistically significant increases in both groups, whereas MIO and protrusive mandibular motion showed no significant changes in either group (p > 0.05). After estimating the differences between the follow-up and baseline outcomes, the mean changes in the primary outcome variables (VAS scores, MIO, and mandibular motion) showed no statistically significant differences between the two groups (p > 0.05). Progressions (reparative remodeling) of hard-tissue TMJ structures were observed on CBCT scans of some participants in both groups. These findings suggested that the use of GCM supplementation after arthrocentesis plus intraarticular HA injection produced no additional clinical benefits or improvements for patients with TMJ-OA compared with arthrocentesis plus intraarticular HA injection alone.

Temporomandibular joint injections in dogs with temporomandibular joint pain: 11 cases (2015-2019)

OBJECTIVES

To describe and evaluate the clinical application of temporomandibular joint injections using betamethasone and ropivacaine in German Shepherd dogs suffering from non-odontogenic orofacial pain due to temporomandibular dysplasia and/or osteoarthritis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Outcomes in dogs presented with clinical signs of non-odontogenic orofacial pain associated to temporomandibular joint dysplasia and/or arthritis and treated with a temporomandibular joint injection were retrospectively-prospectively evaluated.

RESULTS

The overall clinical signs free period ranged between 25 to 1579 days, with an average of 461 days. The clinical signs free period for temporomandibular joint osteoarthritis scores 1, 2 and 3 were on average 659 days (180-1579 days), 134 days (42-355 days) and 723 days (25-1377 days), respectively. Similarly the temporomandibular dysplasia scores 1, 2 and 3 were on average 306 days (26-1579 days), 1377 days and 669 days (25-1429 days) respectively. Those dogs in which only one side was injected the clinical signs free period average was 639 days (25-1578 days), compared with dogs in which both temporomandibular joints were injected showing a clinical signs free period average of 378 days (42-1377 days).

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

The temporomandibular joint injection technique proved to be feasible with a decent outcome in dogs suffering from non-odontogenic orofacial pain associated with temporomandibular joint osteoarthritis and/or dysplasia. Further randomised studies are required to confirm the effectiveness of this intervention.

Ultrasound-guided vs conventional arthrocentesis for management of temporomandibular joint disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare outcomes between ultrasound (US)-guided arthrocentesis and conventional arthrocentesis for the management of temporomandibular joint disorders (TMDs).

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Scopus, BioMed Central, CENTRAL, and Google scholar databases were searched up to April 1 2020 for randomized control trials (RCTs) comparing US-guided and conventional arthrocentesis.

RESULTS

Four RCTs were included. Pooled analysis did not demonstrate any statistically significant difference in pain or maximal mouth opening (MMO) scores after 1 week and 1 month of follow-up between US-guided and conventional arthrocentesis. Studies also reported data on intra-operative needle relocations and operating time but with conflicting results.

CONCLUSION

This study indicates that the use of US during arthrocentesis may not improve postoperative pain and MMO in the short term. Data on intra-operative outcomes are scarce and conflicting for any definitive conclusions. Further high-quality adequately powered RCTs are required to strengthen current evidence.

Interdisciplinary Approach to the Temporomandibular Joint Osteoarthritis-Review of the Literature

Background and objectives: There are an increasing number of patients applying for dental treatment who suffer from temporomandibular joint osteoarthritis (TMJOA). Osteoarthritis may be the cause of the pain in the area of temporomandibular joints, but its course may also be absolutely asymptomatic. The aim of this study was to present an interdisciplinary approach to TMJOA, including current diagnostics and treatment modalities on the basis of the available literature. Materials and Methods: PubMed and Scopus databases were analyzed using the keywords: ((temporomandibular joint AND osteoarthritis) AND imaging) and ((temporomandibular joint AND osteoarthritis) AND treatment). The bibliography was supplemented with books related to the temporomandibular joint. After screening 2450 results, the work was based in total on 98 publications. Results and Conclusions: Osteoarthritis is an inflammatory, age-related, chronic and progressive degenerative joint disease. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT), together with clinical symptoms, play significant roles in TMJOA diagnosis. Current MRI techniques seem to be clinically useful for assessment of bony changes in temporomandibular joint (TMJ) disorders. Treatment of TMJOA requires a complex, interdisciplinary approach. TMJOA treatment includes the cooperation of physiotherapists, rheumatologists, gnathologists, orthodontists and quite often also maxillofacial surgeons and prosthodontists. Sometimes additional pharmacotherapy is indicated. Thorough examination of TMJ function and morphology is necessary at the beginning of any orthodontic or dental treatment. Undiagnosed TMJ dysfunction may cause further problems with the entire masticatory system, including joints, muscles and teeth.

The hierarchy of different treatments for arthrogenous temporomandibular disorders: A network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

PURPOSE

Different treatment options for patients with arthrogenous Temporomandibular Disorders (TMDs) have been reported. However, evidence regarding the most effective intervention using network meta-analysis (NMA) has not been performed. Thus, we conducted a NMA of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) to identify the most effective treatment of arthrogenous TMDs with respect to pain reduction and improved mouth opening, and to generate a ranking according to their effectiveness.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An electronic search on three major databases was undertaken to identify RCTs published before August 2019, comparing up to fourteen different treatments against control/placebo patients for arthrogenous TMDs with respect to pain reduction and improved mouth opening. The treatment variables were controls/placebo, conservative treatment (muscle exercises and occlusal splint therapy), occlusal splint therapy alone, intraarticular injection (IAI) of hyaluronic acid (HA) or corticosteroid (CS), arthrocentesis with or without HA, CS and platelet-rich plasma (PRP), arthroscopy with or without HA and PRP, open joint surgery, and physiotherapy. Frequentist NMA was performed using STATA software. Studies meeting the inclusion criteria were divided according to the length of follow-up (short-term (≤5 months) and intermediate-term (≥6 months to 4 years) and type of TMJ arthrogenous disorders; internal derangement (ID) and TMJ osteoarthritis (OA). The standardized mean differences (SMD) in post-treatment pain reduction and maximum mouth opening (MMO) were analysed.

RESULTS

Thirty-six RCTs were identified that performed comparative outcome assessments for pain and 33 RCTs for MMO. At the short term (≤5 months), IAI-HA (SMD = -2.8, CI: -3.7 to -1.8) and IAI-CS (SMD = -2.11, CI: -2.9 to -1.2) (all very low quality evidence) achieved a substantially greater pain reduction than control/placebo. At intermediate term (≥6 months), a statistically significant decrease in posttreatment pain intensity was observed following Arthroscopy-PRP (SMD = -3.5, CI: -6.2 to -0.82), Arthrocentesis-PRP (SMD = -3.08, CI: -5.44 to -0.71), Arthroscopy-HA (SMD = -3.01, CI: -5.8 to -0.12), TMJ surgery (SMD = -3, CI: -5.7 to -0.28), IAI-HA (SMD = -2.9, CI: -4.9 to -1.09) (all very low quality evidence), Arthroscopy-alone (SMD = -2.6, CI: -5.1 to -0.07, low quality evidence) and Arthrocentesis-HA (SMD = -2.3, CI: -4.5 to -018, moderate-quality evidence) when compared to the control/placebo groups. Relative to MMO, the most effective treatments for short- and intermediate-term improvement were the arthroscopy procedures (PRP > HA > alone, all very low-quality evidence) followed by Arthrocentesis-PRP (very low-quality evidence) and Arthrocentesis-HA (moderate-quality evidence). The non-invasive procedures of occlusal splint therapy, physical therapy, conservative therapy, placebo/control provided significantly lower quality outcomes relative to pain and MMO.

CONCLUSION

The results of the present meta-analysis support a paradigm shift in arthrogenous TMJ disorder treatment. There is a new evidence (though on a very low to moderate quality level) that minimally invasive procedures, particularly in combination with IAI of adjuvant pharmacological agents (PRP, HA or CS), are significantly more effective than conservative treatments for both pain reduction and improvement of MMO in both short (≤5 months) and intermediate term (6 months-4 years) periods. In contrast to traditional concepts mandating exhaustion of conservative treatment options, minimally invasive procedures, therefore, deserve to be implemented as efficient first-line treatments (e.g. IAIs and/or arthrocentesis) or should be considered rather early, i.e. as soon as patients do not show a clear benefit from an initial conservative treatment.

Intra-articular injection of a mixture of hyaluronic acid and corticosteroid versus arthrocentesis in TMJ internal derangement

BACKGROUND

Internal derangements are the commonest disorders of temporomandibular joint (TMJ). Different treatment modalities have been proposed to treat this disorder. Arthrocentesis and intra-articular injection are gaining popularity in the treatment of internal derangement of TMJ.

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare between the effect of arthrocentesis and intra-articular injection using a mixture of hyaluronic acid and corticosteroid in the management of TMJ internal derangement.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixteen patients with TMJ internal derangement were selected and divided into 2 equal groups. In group I, arthrocentesis was performed with Ringer solution. In group II, intra-articular injection was performed with a mixture of 0.5ml hyaluronic acid and 0.5ml corticosteroid. Assessment of pain, maximum mouth opening, lateral movement and clicking was done before the treatment, one week, one month and three months after the treatment. All parameters were subjected to statistical analysis.

RESULTS

All studied parameters showed improvements. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups regarding intensity of pain, maximum mouth opening, lateral movement and joint sound.

CONCLUSIONS

TMJ arthrocentesis and intra-articular injection of a mixture of hyaluronic acid and corticosteroid have been found to be effective for treatment of TMJ internal derangement with reduction. Nevertheless, the simplicity of intra articular injection makes it the treatment of choice.

The use of intra-articular analgesics to improve outcomes after temporomandibular joint arthrocentesis: a review

PURPOSE

The aim of this review was to assess the efficacy of intra-articular analgesics in improving outcomes after temporomandibular joint (TMJ) arthrocentesis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An electronic search of PubMed, Scopus, and Google scholar databases was performed for papers in English published up to December 2017 reporting the use of intra-articular analgesics after TMJ arthrocentesis. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials (CCTs), comparative studies, retrospective studies, and case series were included while case reports, technical reports, animal studies, cadaveric studies, and review papers were excluded.

RESULTS

Of the six studies included in the review, three were RCTs, two were randomized comparative studies, and one was a retrospective study. Both opioids and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs have been used after TMJ arthrocentesis. Morphine, tramadol, fentanyl, buprenorphine, tenoxicam, and COX-2 inhibitors are the drugs used till date. Placebo-controlled studies reported improved outcomes after TMJ arthrocentesis with morphine and fentanyl but no such results with buprenorphine and tenoxicam. Tramadol was found to be better than COX-2 inhibitor. The quality of literature was not high.

CONCLUSIONS

There is inconclusive evidence in literature on the benefits of using intra-articular analgesics after TMJ arthrocentesis. Well-designed high-quality RCTs with standard protocol studying the effects of intra-articular opioids and NSAIDS after TMJ arthrocentesis would provide stronger evidence on its use.

Pain relief following a single-dose intra-articular injection of methylprednisolone in the temporomandibular joint arthralgia-A multicentre randomised controlled trial

Background

Temporomandibular joint (TMJ) arthralgia is a painful condition assumed to be associated with local inflammation.

Objective

The objective of the present study was to determine the efficacy for reducing pain of a single‐dose intra‐articular (IA) injection of methylprednisolone to the TMJ. The hypothesis was that methylprednisolone would effectively reduce TMJ pain.

Methods

This randomised, double‐blind, parallel‐group, multicentre, controlled study included visits for enrolment, treatment and 4‐week follow‐up. The study included patients 18 years and older who had been diagnosed with unilateral TMJ arthralgia. All participants were randomly assigned to receive 1 mL IA injections of methylprednisolone or saline. The primary outcome was change in recorded pain intensity on a visual analogue scale (VAS) at maximum jaw opening, analysed in the per protocol population.

Results

In total, 54 patients were randomly assigned to single‐dose IA injections with methylprednisolone (n = 27) or saline (n = 27). Between baseline and the 4‐week follow‐up, VAS‐rated pain intensity at maximum jaw opening decreased from a mean of 61.0 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 50.1; 70.7) to 33.9 (95% CI: 21.6; 46.2) in the methylprednisolone group and from 59.6 (95% CI: 50.7; 65.9) to 33.9 (95% CI: 23.8; 43.9) in the saline group. The between‐group difference was not significant (P = 0.812). Treatment‐related adverse events were doubled in the methylprednisolone group.

Conclusion

Methylprednisolone provided no additional benefit for reducing pain, but caused more harm compared with saline following a single‐dose IA injection in patients with TMJ arthralgia.

Is arthrocentesis of temporomandibular joint with corticosteroids beneficial? A systematic review

Background

Temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) are musculoskeletal conditions that can inhibit the normal function of temporomandibular joints (TMJs) and affect the patient’s quality of life, negatively. Arthrocentesis (AC) is a minimally invasive surgical procedure used for treating TMDs. The aim of present paper is to evaluate the advantages of administrating corticosteroid (CS) during AC by reviewing high quality released articles.

Material and Methods

Searching on Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Google Scholar, PubMed, ProQuest, and Scopus databases were performed with focusing on proper key words. Related titles and abstracts, up to December 2017, were screened and selected based on inclusion criteria. The full text of all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was extensively read and subjected to quality assessments.

Results

After initial search, a total of 2067 articles were included into the study. Finally, 7 studies were reliable enough in methodology and randomization to be included into the study. All of the observed studies showed improvements in jaw functions and pain relief with no statistical differences in both AC and control groups. One study reported painless maximum incisal opening in CS group than the control group.

Conclusions

Based on available RCTs, the AC of TMJ with CS seems to result in similar findings to other therapeutic drugs, with no significant differences.

Key words:Arthrocentesis, corticosteroid, temporomandibular joints, temporomandibular joint disorders.