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

Cranio. 2023 May;41(3):264-273. doi: 10.1080/08869634.2020.1829870. Epub 2020 Oct 12.

Abstract

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.

Keywords: Ultrasonography; arthrocentesis; internal derangement; temporomandibular joint.

Publication types

  • Meta-Analysis
  • Systematic Review
  • Review

MeSH terms

  • Arthrocentesis* / methods
  • Humans
  • Range of Motion, Articular
  • Temporomandibular Joint
  • Temporomandibular Joint Disorders* / diagnostic imaging
  • Temporomandibular Joint Disorders* / surgery
  • Treatment Outcome
  • Ultrasonography, Interventional