A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing arthrocentesis with conservative management for painful temporomandibular joint disorder

Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine whether arthrocentesis is superior to conservative treatment in the management of painful temporomandibular joint disorders with restricted opening. A systematic review was undertaken of prospective randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing arthrocentesis to conservative management, identified in the MEDLINE and PubMed databases. Inclusion criteria included a 6-month follow-up, with clinical assessment of the patients and painful restricted mouth opening. Data extracted included pain measured on a visual analogue scale and maximum mouth opening measured in millimetres. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2 for RCTs, and a meta-analysis with the random-effects model was undertaken. Of 879 records retrieved, seven met the inclusion criteria; these RCTs reported the results at 6 months for 448 patients. One study had a low risk of bias, four studies had an uncertain risk, and two had a high risk of bias. In the meta-analysis, arthrocentesis was statistically superior to conservative management at 6 months for an increase in maximum mouth opening (1.12 mm, 95% confidence interval 0.45–1.78 mm; P = 0.001; I2 = 87%) and borderline superior for pain reduction (−1.09 cm, 95% confidence interval −2.19 to 0.01 cm; P = 0.05; I2 = 100%). However, these differences are unlikely to be clinically relevant.