Is Repeated Arthrocentesis Beneficial in the Treatment of Temporomandibular Disorders: A Retrospective Study

Kütük, Nükhet; Baş, Burcu; Kazan, Dilara; Yuceer, Ezgi

doi:10.1016/j.joms.2019.01.041

Cited by 7 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Intra-articular dysfunction of TMJ includes disc displacement with or without reduction which, if left untreated can progress to degenerative changes of the involved joint. Inflammation is one of the main cause among many underlying etiological factors that cause pain and dysfunction 2,10 . TMD patients have physical as well as psychological impact of the disease and their routine and quality of life is adversely affected 6,11,12 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…TMJ arthrocentesis is a minimally invasive treatment option between conservative management and invasive surgery. It is considered superior treatment option after the failure of conservative management of TMD patients 5,10,13 . It functions by flushing out inflammatory mediators, degraded proteins from superior joint space with sterile solution as they are the main cause of pain.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of Arthrocentesis Plus Platelet Rich Plasma With Arthrocentesis Alone in the Treatment of Temporomandibular Joint Dysfunction

Sarwar

Shah

Khan

et al. 2021

PAFMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To evaluate the role of combination therapy of platelet rich plasma (PRP) with arthrocentesis and to compare it with arthrocentesis alone in the temporomandibular dysfuction (TMD) patients.Study Design: Quasi experimental study.Place and Duration of Study: Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery department, Armed Forces Institute of Dentistry, Combined Military Hospital Rawalpindi, from Jan 2017 to Jun 2019.Methodology: Forty-two patients diagnosed with refractory unilateral temporomandibular dysfuction, were included in the study. Patients were divided in two groups with 21 temporomandibular joints in each. Arthrocentesis alone was the control group (group I) and arthrocentesis with intra-articular injection of platelet rich plasma (group II) was the study group. Treatment outcomes were assessed and compared for all patients based on clinical parameters of pre and post treatment; for pain, maximal mouth opening and temporomandibular joint clicking sounds. Results: Out of 42 patients, 33 (79%) were females and 9 (21%) were males with mean age of 34.3 ± 8.4 years. There was statistically significant difference in both groups for all variables. The p-value of maximum mouth opening of both groups before and after treatment was 0.746 and 0.01, joint clicking sounds were present in 69% of our patients before the treament and it reduced to 14% after the treatment. There was marked gradual decrease in pain of both groups, group I (6.48 ± 1.470 to 1.81 ± 0.602) and group II (7.29 ± 1.007 to 1.19 ± 0.402). Conclusion: Combination therapy of platelet rich plasma with arthrocentesis is more effective treatment method than.......

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Arthrocentesis Plus Platelet Rich Plasma With Arthrocentesis Alone in the Treatment of Temporomandibular Joint Dysfunction

Sarwar

Shah

Khan

et al. 2021

PAFMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the case of rinsing the joint cavity, attempts are also made to examine the differences between the following techniques: (1) two-needle; (2) two-way needle; (3) one-way needle (pumping technique) [20][21][22][23][24]. Furthermore, arthrocentesis protocols also differ in terms of the following: (1) the type of irrigant; (2) the volume of the rinsing agent; (3) single use or repetition of the intervention at different time intervals [17,23,25]. It is common to combine lavage with active substance administration in one intervention.…”

Section: Introduction 1backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Temporomandibular Joint Injections and Lavage: An Overview of Reviews

Turosz,

Chęcińska,

Chęciński

et al. 2024

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: This overview was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Overviews of Reviews guidelines and aimed to collect and compare the results of systematic reviews on temporomandibular joint injection treatment. Methods: Systematic reviews of randomized clinical trials on temporomandibular disorders treated with lavage or intra-articular administrations were qualified for syntheses. The final searches were conducted on 27 February 2024, without time frame restrictions. Results: Of the 232 identified records, 42 systematic reviews were selected. The most evidence-based conclusions call into question the clinical differences between many therapeutic approaches, including the following: (1) injectable selection for the treatment of pain and hypomobility; (2) the method of performing arthrocentesis; (3) the use of imaging when rinsing the TMJ cavity; (4) the supplementation of the extracapsular administration of unprocessed blood with intracapsular deposition in the treatment of TMJ hypermobility. Conclusions: Systematic reviews based solely on randomized clinical trials proved the following differences: (1) in painful temporomandibular hypomobility, a better therapeutic effect is observed with arthrocentesis followed by I-PRF administration compared to lavage alone; (2) in painful temporomandibular hypomobility, inferior- or double-compartment injection leads to better results than superior-compartment injection; (3) in temporomandibular joint recurrent dislocation, hypertonic dextrose administration is superior to placebo, although (4) unprocessed blood has a better effect than hypertonic dextrose. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42024496142.

show abstract

“…Repeated arthrocentesis proved to be more successful at reducing pain and improving MMO than a single intervention in the treatment of TMJ closed lock (24) . However, repeated injection of single corticosteroid injection was safe with the return of joint structures to its normal cellular structure after two weeks while double injection with six weeks apart resulted in irreversible damage to the components of the joint and three injections with six weeks apart resulted in massive destruction to most of the temporomandibular joint structures (25) .…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

Evaluation of the effect of intra-articular injection of macrolide antibiotics versus corticosteroids on internal derangement of temporomandibular joint.

Mosleh

Ghanem

2021

Egyptian Dental Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Is Repeated Arthrocentesis Beneficial in the Treatment of Temporomandibular Disorders: A Retrospective Study

Cited by 7 publications

References 30 publications

Comparison of Arthrocentesis Plus Platelet Rich Plasma With Arthrocentesis Alone in the Treatment of Temporomandibular Joint Dysfunction

Comparison of Arthrocentesis Plus Platelet Rich Plasma With Arthrocentesis Alone in the Treatment of Temporomandibular Joint Dysfunction

Temporomandibular Joint Injections and Lavage: An Overview of Reviews

Evaluation of the effect of intra-articular injection of macrolide antibiotics versus corticosteroids on internal derangement of temporomandibular joint.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About