SynthesisOral diseases2026
Efficacy and Safety of Intra-Articular Therapies for Temporomandibular Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Oral diseases, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Standalone Intra-Articular Injections for Temporomandibular Joint Disorders: Overview of Meta-Analytic Evidence.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the most effective minimally invasive intra-articular procedure for reducing pain and improving maximum mouth opening (MMO) in individuals diagnosed with painful articular TMD, specifically TMJ osteoarthritis and/or internal derangement. MATERIALS AND
methodsOnly randomized clinical trials (RCTs) assessing the efficacy of minimally invasive procedures, such as arthrocentesis and intra-articular injection (IAI), were included. The meta-analysis included seven studies with a 6-month follow-up, while 23 studies with different follow-up periods were evaluated qualitatively.
resultsThe meta-analysis showed that IAI with tenoxicam was the most effective procedure for pain reduction, with the highest [7.44 mean difference (MD); 6.28-8.60 confidence interval (CI)], followed by opioids (5.93; 5.03-6.83), the combination of hyaluronic acid (HA) with platelet-rich plasma (PRP) (5.10; 4.52-5.68), and PRP alone (4.99; 3.13-6.85). For improvement in MMO, tenoxicam had the highest MD (+11.50 mm; 15.47-7.53), followed by PRP (+10.46 mm; 14.89-6.02) and the HA-PRP combination (+10.10 mm; 11.89-8.31).
conclusionsTenoxicam showed promising results for pain reduction and improvement in MMO, although the evidence remains limited, followed by opioids and the combination of HA and PRP with arthrocentesis. Further high-quality studies are needed to confirm their clinical applicability.
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.