Ultrasonography-guided arthrocentesis versus conventional arthrocentesis in treating internal derangement of temporomandibular joint: a systematic review

Leung, Yiu Yan; Wu, Felix Ho Won; Chan, Ho Hin

doi:10.1007/s00784-020-03408-z

Cited by 9 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A variety of drugs are available for injection therapy in the management of TMD [ 46 ]. They are usually classified by the mode of delivery: either as intra-articular injection, into the TMJ alone or as part of an arthrocentesis procedure [ 121 , 122 ]; or into the mastication muscles [ 123 ], and this article shall focus on the latter. Usually targeted at the MTrPs, intramuscular injections are also termed trigger point injections (TPIs).…”

Section: Treatment Modalitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnosis and Treatment of Myogenous Temporomandibular Disorders: A Clinical Update

Chan

et al. 2022

Diagnostics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Myogenous temporomandibular disorders (M-TMDs) are the most common chronic orofacial pain, affecting the masticatory muscles and, thus, jaw movement. While a concise diagnosis is crucial to formulate a rational treatment plan, the similarities in clinical presentations that M-TMDs share with other neuromuscular disorders affecting the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) could easily confuse physicians. In addition to the basics, such as thorough history taking and meticulous clinical examinations, different imaging techniques are useful adjuncts to facilitate the diagnostic process. This review presents an overview of the current understanding on a variety of diagnostic and treatment modalities for M-TMD patients. It is essential to highlight that there is not a single treatment for all, and the benefits of multidisciplinary strategies have been noted for the effective management of myogenous TMD pain. Treatment modalities ranging from conservative to minimally invasive options are discussed in this review.

show abstract

Section: Treatment Modalitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnosis and Treatment of Myogenous Temporomandibular Disorders: A Clinical Update

Chan

et al. 2022

Diagnostics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The literature comparing US-guided arthrocentesis vs. the blind technique is scarce. Two systematic reviews have been published recently, 23,24 in which very similar conclusions were reached, since they both selected the same articles for the final analysis. [9][10][11][12] Both reviews found no significant differences in pain reduction and the maximum mouth opening, no conclusive results were observed in reducing needle repositioning, and also data on the potential to reduce the procedure time was inconclusive.…”

Section: Ultrasound-guided Minimally Invasive Procedures For Tmj Painmentioning

confidence: 83%

“…Among the selected articles, 4 were randomized clinical trials (RCTs), [9][10][11][12] 1 was a non-controlled clinical trial (CT), 13 3 were retrospective studies (RSs), [14][15][16] 1 was a case report (CR), 17 2 were technical notes (TNs), 18,19 3 were cadaveric studies (Cad), [20][21][22] and 2 were systematic reviews. 23,24 The details of the included primary studies are presented in Table 1.…”

Section: Search Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Advantages of ultrasound guidance for TMJ arthrocentesis and intra-articular injection: A narrative review

Nordenflycht¹,

Tesch²

2022

Dent. Med. Probl.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ultrasound (US) is a widely available, low-cost, non-invasive, and safe medical imaging method that enables real-time observation. Ultrasound offers several advantages for dentomaxillofacial images, such as portability, the possibility of dynamic and repeated examinations, patient comfort, and availability. It is a useful tool for recognizing the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) structures and their involvement during the course of different pathological processes, such as articular disk displacement, joint effusion and cortical erosion. In addition to its diagnostic use, US has been proposed as an auxiliary tool in minimally invasive procedures for arthrogenic temporomandibular disorders (TMD) to achieve an accurate puncture, recognize joint spaces and reduce surgical trauma. While US is widely used for large joints to visualize internal structures and guide the injection, this technique has only recently gained popularity for the TMJ procedures. Hence, the literature on this topic is scarce.The present review describes the potential advantages and the clinical technique of US guidance for TMJ arthrocentesis and intra-articular injection (IAI).

show abstract

“…In the management of arthrogenous TMDs, arthrocentesis has become a standard treatment option, due to its high efficacy and safety [ 14 , 43 ]. However, different techniques of arthrocentesis exist in the literature and in clinical practice, such as additional injection materials into the superior joint space [ 41 , 42 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 ], the use of ultra-sound guidance [ 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 ] single versus double puncture techniques [ 30 , 32 , 53 , 54 ] and the timing of the procedure [ 19 , 55 ]. Specifically, the ideal irrigation volume for arthrocentesis of the TMJ remains a controversy.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Ultrasonography-guided arthrocentesis versus conventional arthrocentesis in treating internal derangement of temporomandibular joint: a systematic review

Cited by 9 publications

References 41 publications

Diagnosis and Treatment of Myogenous Temporomandibular Disorders: A Clinical Update

Diagnosis and Treatment of Myogenous Temporomandibular Disorders: A Clinical Update

Advantages of ultrasound guidance for TMJ arthrocentesis and intra-articular injection: A narrative review

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About