SynthesisBMC oral health2024
Arthrocentesis for temporomandibular joint disorders: a network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
Synthesis in BMC oral health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effectiveness of arthrocentesis versus other therapeutic modalities in patients with temporomandibular disorders. Systematic review and meta-analysis.The Japanese dental science review · 2026Review
- Stepwise management of temporomandibular joint internal derangement: from conservative therapy to arthrocentesis with intra-articular hyaluronic acid and 12.5% dextrose.Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons · 2026Article
- Review
- Diagnosis-based pathways for conservative and minimally invasive management of temporomandibular disorders: a scoping review.Journal of oral & facial pain and headache · 2026Article
- Evolution and mechanistic insights of platelet-derived products in temporomandibular joint regeneration.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026Review
- Prolotherapy for temporomandibular joint disorders: an updated comprehensive review.Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons · 2025Review
- Use of liquid platelet-rich fibrin (liquid PRF) in temporomandibular joint disorders: A narrative review with clinical recommendations.Periodontology 2000 · 2025Review
- Autogenous Injections in Temporomandibular Disorders: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Pharmacological and non-pharmacological approaches to temporomandibular disorder chronic pain: a narrative review.Pain management · 2025Review
- Arthrocentesis of Temporomandibular Joints-A Clinical Comparative Study.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveClinical studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of arthrocentesis in managing temporomandibular joint disorders (TMDs). However, there is a lack of consensus among these studies regarding the selection of injectables. Furthermore, an increasing number of drugs have been tested for TMDs in recent years, complicating the decision-making process for clinicians. This study conducted a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the clinical efficacy of different arthrocentesis treatment regimens.
methodsWe conducted a comprehensive search of Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science to gather articles on RCTs pertaining to the management of TMDs using arthrocentesis. This search spanned from inception of these databases up to July 29, 2024. We then performed a network meta-analysis using Stata 17.0 software. The outcome indicators used were VAS scores and changes in unassisted maximum opening. To determine the efficacy of each regimen, we employed surface-under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) ranking.
resultForty RCTs were included, encompassing 1904 temporomandibular joints (TMJs) cases. Treatment options encompass platelet-rich plasma (PRP), hyaluronic acid (HA), corticosteroids (CS), bone marrow concentrate (BMAC), injectable platelet-rich fibrin (i-PRF), concentrated growth factor (CGF), Tenoxicam (TX), microfragmented adipose tissue (FAT), and their combination regimens. The SUCRA ranking revealed that the most effective treatment options at 1-, 3-, and 6-months post-arthrocentesis were HA + PRP, i-PRF, and BMAC, respectively.
conclusionHA + PRP, i-PRF and BMAC may represent the optimal arthrocentesis agents for the management of TMDs symptoms and restoration of TMJ function in the short, medium, and long term, respectively. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ , identifier CRD42024563975.
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.