Observational studyPloS one2019
The use of arthrocentesis in patients with temporomandibular joint disc displacement without reduction.
Observational study in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06782178 (Temporomandibular Joint Arthroscopic Lysis and Lavage Compared to Arthrocentesis in Disc Displacement Without Reduction), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Temporomandibular Joint Arthroscopic Lysis and Lavage Compared to Arthrocentesis in Disc Displacement Without Reduction: a Randomised, Double-blind, Controlled Trial
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Double-Puncture Versus Single-Puncture Arthrocentesis: A Randomized Controlled Trial with 3 Years of Follow-Up.Journal of oral & facial pain and headacheTrial
- Article
- Is arthrocentesis effective for temporomandibular joint disorders?Acta cirurgica brasileira · 2025Review
- A Bibliometric Analysis of Research on Temporomandibular Joint Disc Displacement from 1992 to 2022.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- State of the Art in Temporomandibular Joint Arthrocentesis-A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Puncture points related to the tragal-lateral canthus line in conventional temporomandibular joint arthrocentesis: are they accurate? A cadaver study.Oral and maxillofacial surgery · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of the use of the arthrocentesis in patients with disc displacement without reduction (DDWOR). Two hundred and thirty-four (234) patients with DDWOR were evaluated and the following data collected: gender; affected side; age (years); duration of the pain (months); patient's perception of pain (measured by Visual Analogue Scale [VAS 0-10]); maximal interincisal distance (MID) (mm); and joint disc position, determined by magnetic resonance imaging. Data were obtained in two different moments: before the arthrocentesis (M1) and three or four months later (M2). Paired t-Student Test, Scores Test and Wilcoxon Test showed a statistical significant difference (p<0.0001) between the M1 and M2 for the variables VAS and MID. There was an alteration in the joint disc position in 93.88% of the cases after arthrocentesis. There was no association between the general characteristics of the patients on the M1 and the results of the arthrocentesis (p>0.05). It can be concluded that the arthrocentesis is efficient in reducing the pain, in increasing interincisal distance, and altering the joint disc position in patients with DDWOR regardless gender, age side and pain duration.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.