PURPOSE

Arthrogenic temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) that do not respond to conservative treatment necessitate the use of semi-conservative methods, such as arthrocentesis. However, the ranking of intraarticular devices used in arthrocentesis remains controversial. Therefore, a network meta-analysis and systematic review were conducted to compare the different materials used for arthrocentesis.

STUDY SELECTION

Databases of Cochrane Library, EMBASE, PubMed, and Web of Science were searched systematically to retrieve randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in English comparing the efficacy of different intraarticular materials used for arthrocentesis. The mean differences (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated for maximum mouth opening (MMO) and pain perception using Bayesian network meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Among the 7674 studies retrieved, 13 RCTs were included in the quantitative synthesis. Evaluation of the short-term follow-up (1-3 months) outcomes revealed that saline-platelet-rich plasma (saline-PRP) and saline-steroid yielded the greatest improvement in MMO, with MDs of 3.49 (CI: -4.23, 10.81) and 3.36 (CI: -4.70, 10.46), respectively. Saline-PRP exhibited improvement in terms of pain reduction (MD=-2.72 (CI: -5.80, 0.35). Evaluation of the long-term follow-up outcomes revealed that saline-PRP yielded promising results for both outcomes: MD of 1.58 (CI: -6.84, 9.92) and -2.79 (CI: -9.44, 3.60) for MMO and pain reduction, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Saline-PRP injection led to a clinically noticeable shift in MMO and pain perception in the short term; in contrast, the results of saline-PRP, saline-hyaluronic acid (HA), and saline steroids were statistically insignificant. Saline-HA and saline-steroid effectively increased MMO in the long term, whereas saline-PRP yielded the most distinct reduction in pain.