The impact of arthrocentesis with and without hyaluronic acid injection in the prognosis and synovial fluid myeloperoxidase levels of patients with painful symptomatic internal derangement of temporomandibular joint: a randomised controlled clinical trial

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.

Intra-articular injection of platelet-rich plasma vs hyaluronic acid as an adjunct to TMJ arthrocentesis: A systematic review and 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 I2 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.

Intraarticular injections of hyaluronic acid in arthrocentesis and arthroscopy as a treatment of temporomandibular joint disorders: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the benefits of hyaluronic acid intraarticular injection (HA IAI), in conjunction with minimally invasive surgery (arthrocentesis or arthroscopy), as a therapeutic option for temporomandibular joint disorders.

METHODS

An electronic search in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases was conducted in order to answer the following PICOS question: "In clinical trials with patients treated with arthroscopy or arthrocentesis, did the subsequent use of HA IAI provide a better control of postoperative pain and temporomandibular joint function compared to those patients who did not receive it?"

RESULTS

Following PRISMA criteria, six randomized controlled clinical trials were selected. HA IAI showed significant differences in terms of pain reduction in three of them and improvement of mandibular function in two, compared to the control group.

CONCLUSION

Based on scientific evidence, the level of recommendation found regarding this type of intervention is type B (recommendation based on inconsistent or limited-quality patient-oriented evidence).

Treatments for painful temporomandibular disc displacement with reduction: a network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

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.

Platelet-rich plasma therapy for temporomandibular joint osteoarthritis: A randomized controlled trial

The study aimed to compare the efficacy of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections for the treatment of temporomandibular joint osteoarthritis (TMJ-OA) with hyaluronic acid (HA) therapy. This randomized controlled trial included 70 patients with TMJ-OA, randomly divided into either a PRP or HA group. The pain intensity, maximum mouth opening (MMO), TMJ sound score, and proportion of crepitus were recorded and compared at baseline and at 1, 3, and 6 months. Both groups showed statistically significant improvements in pain intensity, MMO, TMJ sound, and scale scores during the 6-month follow-up period. The improvements in pain intensity during mouth opening at 1 month, MMO at 1, 3, and 6 months, TMJ sound score at 1 and 3 months, and GAD-7 score at 6 months in the PRP group were greater than in the HA group (p < 0.05). Compared with the HA group, imaging improvement in the PRP group was also higher (p < 0.05). Within the limitations of the study it seems that the application of PRP therapy in TMJ-OA is should be considered whenever possible.

Current Clinical Research Directions on Temporomandibular Joint Intra-Articular Injections: A Mapping Review

This mapping review aims to identify and discuss current research directions on intracavitary temporomandibular joints (TMJs) injections. The inclusion criteria allowed studies published in the last full six years, based on patients diagnosed with temporomandibular joint disorders (TMDs), treated by TMJ intra-articular injections. Medical databases covered by the Association for Computing Machinery, Bielefeld Academic Search Engine, PubMed, and Elsevier Scopus engines were searched. The results were visualized with tables, charts, and diagrams. Of the 2712 records identified following the selection process, 152 reports were qualified for review. From January 2017, viscosupplementation with hyaluronic acid (HA) was the best-documented injectable administered into TMJ cavities. However, a significant growing trend was observed in the number of primary studies on centrifuged blood preparations administrations that surpassed the previously leading HA from 2021.

Comparison of the Efficacy of Two Protocol Treatments in Patients with Symptomatic Disc Displacement without Reduction: A Randomized Controlled Trial

The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of arthrocentesis followed by hyaluronic acid infiltration treatment (ASH) and mandibular exercise therapy (MET) in patients with symptomatic disc displacement without reduction (DDwoR) by examining pain intensity (VAS), mandibular range of motion (MO), and quality of life (QoL). Fifty-two patients were randomly allocated into two groups, MET (N = 26) and ASH (N = 26), and therapy was applied at the baseline and one month after. Patients were followed up at 1 and 12 months after the baseline assessment. Clinical and patient-reported outcomes were compared at the baseline, 1-month follow-up, and 12-month follow-up. The study found no significant differences in VAS and MO between the ASH and MET groups at the baseline. However, while not significant, it was noted that the ASH group showed higher values for MO. Regarding OHIP-14 at 1 month of follow-up, the ASH group showed significant improvements in physical pain (p > 0.01), physical and psychological disability (p = 0.043 and p = 0.029), and handicap (p = 0.033). At the 12-month follow-up, the ASH group showed significant improvements in functional limitation, psychological discomfort, psychological disability, and handicap (p = 0.008, p = 0.001, p = 0.001, p = 0.005, respectively). ASH treatment did not reduce pain or improve mandibular range of motion more than physical therapy in patients with symptomatic DDwoR. However, ASH could be preferable given its positive long-term effects on patients' quality of life. The clinician's main objective is to prioritize the treatment plan order with a focus on the patient's quality of life. Accordingly, healthcare professionals should consider ASH as a treatment option for patients with symptomatic DDwoR who desire long-term improvement in their quality of life.

Does the Use of Injectable Platelet-Rich Fibrin After Arthrocentesis for Disc Displacement Without Reduction Improve Clinical Outcomes?

PURPOSE

Many studies have reported the role of arthrocentesis to alleviate symptoms of patients with disc displacement without reduction (DDWoR). Nevertheless, the benefit of injectable platelet-rich fibrin (i-PRF) remains unclear. The aim of this study was to answer the following question: among patients with DDWoR, do those treated with intra-articular injection of i-PRF after arthrocentesis, when compared to those treated with arthrocentesis only, have better clinical outcomes in terms of pain reduction and improvement of jaw movement?

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This single-blind randomized, controlled study included patients with diagnosed DDWoR, in the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery at the School of Dentistry, Ege University, who had localized joint pain and limited range of motion. Patients were treated either with arthrocentesis (AC group) or arthrocentesis in combination with intra-articular i-PRF injection (AC + i-PRF group). The predictor variable was treatment (ie, arthrocentesis with or without i-PRF). The primary outcome variable was pain (visual analog scale). The secondary outcome variables were maximum mouth opening, lateral and protrusive movements. Outcome variables were recorded at pretreatment and at the postoperative 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 6th, and 12th months. Statistical analysis was performed using the Brunner-Langer model, with a significance level P < .05.

RESULTS

This study comprised 76 patients (34 females/4 males, mean age 47.2 ± 9.1 for the AC + i-PRF group; 35 females/3 males, mean age 46.8 ± 10.2 for the AC group). The treatment success rate was 73.7% for the AC group and 100% for the AC + i-PRF group (P = .012). Pain levels in the AC + i-PRF group were found to decrease more than the AC group over 12 months postoperatively (palpation: -6.9 ± 1.2 vs -5.3 ± 1.3; chewing: -6.9 ± 1.5 vs -5.1 ± 1.7; jaw movements: -6.9 ± 1.1 vs -5.1 ± 1.4). This difference was statistically significant (P < .001). The degree of jaw movement in the AC + i-PRF group was found to increase more than the AC group over 12 months postoperatively (maximum mouth opening: 8.0 ± 2.1 vs 4.9 ± 2.0; contralateral: 1.8 ± 0.8 vs 0.2 ± 1.0; ipsilateral: 2.9 ± 1.3 vs 0.8 ± 1.5; protrusive: 2.6 ± 1.1 vs 0.8 ± 1.3). This difference was statistically significant (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Intra-articular injection of i-PRF after arthrocentesis produced greater improvements in pain reduction and jaw movement when compared to arthrocentesis only. These results indicate that i-PRF used in combination with arthrocentesis is an effective adjunctive treatment.

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.

Double-Needle Arthrocentesis with Viscosupplementation in Patients with Temporomandibular Joint Disc Displacement without Reduction

OBJECTIVES

Arthrocentesis is the simplest surgical intervention for the temporomandibular joint (TMJ). It can be performed on an outpatient basis at a low cost and with low morbidity. The objective is to release the articular disc by disrupting the adhesion formed between its surfaces and the mandibular fossa through hydraulic pressure generated by irrigation of the upper compartment of the TMJ. Viscosupplementation with hyaluronic acid during or after arthrocentesis improves clinical outcomes, increases mouth opening, and reduces pain levels. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficiency of arthrocentesis plus hyaluronic acid viscosupplementation through clinical examination and preoperative magnetic resonance imaging in patients with unilateral disc displacement without reduction (DDwoR).

METHODS

This analytical retrospective cross-sectional study clinically and radiologically evaluated 72 patients of both sexes with unilateral DDwoR. The following data were collected: sex, pain, age, duration of pain, maximum mouth opening, and patient pain perception on a visual analog scale. TMJ arthrocentesis was performed only once for each of the indicated joints. Data were collected before arthrocentesis (baseline) and at 7, 14, 30, 60, 90, and 180 days after the procedure (final evaluation).

RESULTS

Between the baseline and final evaluation, there was a significant reduction in pain (p=0.001) and restoration of articular function. In addition, there was a significant increase in maximum mouth opening (p=0.001).

CONCLUSION

Patients with DDwoR undergoing arthrocentesis combined with hyaluronic acid injection showed significant improvement in the perceived pain and maximum mouth opening in the mid-term follow-up periods.

Is Single-Puncture TMJ Arthrocentesis Superior to the Double-Puncture Technique for the Improvement of Outcomes in Patients With TMDs?

PURPOSE

Arthrocentesis is a common treatment for temporomandibular joint disorders. Although modifications of the standard double-puncture technique have been described, no consensus has been reached regarding which is the best. The aim of the present study was to compare the outcomes of the single- and double-puncture arthrocentesis techniques (SPT and DPT, respectively).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review following the PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses) guidelines was performed. Two independent reviewers conducted electronic searches in the MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases for relevant studies reported up to January 2019. Studies comparing type I SPT (only 1 cannula) or type II SPT (2 soldered cannulas) to conventional DPT were considered. Data regarding the maximal mouth opening (MMO), joint pain, and operative time were extracted for the meta-analysis. In the case of statistically significant heterogeneity (P < .10), a random effects model was used to assess the significance of the treatment effects. Otherwise, a fixed effects model was used. The included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were assessed for methodologic quality using the Cochrane Collaboration tool.

RESULTS

Nine studies were included for qualitative synthesis. Two were suitable for quantitative synthesis per outcome. The meta-analysis did not find any differences between SPT and DPT in relation to the MMO. However, in relation to joint pain, the results slightly favored the use of DPT. No differences in operative time were found between type I SPT and DPT (P = .49).

CONCLUSIONS

The present study found no differences between the SPT and DPT in relation to the MMO, and no difference was found in operative time between the DPT and type I SPT. Because of the heterogeneity between studies, it might be interesting to conduct more homogeneous RCTs to elucidate which technique results in better clinical outcomes.

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.

Efficacy of viscosupplementation with hyaluronic acid in temporomandibular disorders: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To perform a systematic review of the viscosupplementation effectiveness with hyaluronic acid (HA) in the articular Temporomandibular Dysfunctions (TMDs) clinical management.

METHOD

Electronic searches were performed in the following databases: MEDLINE (via PubMed), Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, LILACS, BBO, SIGLE (System for Information on Grey Literature in Europe), ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Brazilian Clinical Trials Registry (ReBec). Only randomized clinical trials that evaluated the intra-articular administration of HA or its derivatives in osteoarthritis and/or anterior displacement of the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) disc were included. The primary outcomes evaluated were patients' self-report of pain and/or discomfort in the TMJ. Each study was assessed for the risk of bias, using the Cochrane collaboration's risk of bias tool.

RESULTS

A total of 640 studies were obtained in the electronic search. After the application of the eligibility criteria, manual search, and duplicate removal, 21 articles were included. Five articles classified their volunteers with internal derangements of the TMJ, in 4 articles the treatment was directed to participants with disc displacement with reduction and the other articles evaluated HA therapy in osteoarthritis. The protocols presented heterogeneity, varying in the form of application, associated or not with arthrocentesis, number of applications, molecular weight, dose and concentration. Nine studies presented high risk of bias.

CONCLUSION

Due to the heterogeneity and methodological inconsistencies of the studies evaluated, it was not possible to establish the efficacy of HA in articular TMDs.