ArticleOdontology2026
Platelet lysate versus hyaluronic acid after arthrocentesis in the treatment of temporomandibular joint anterior disc displacement with reduction: a randomized clinical trial.
Article in Odontology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06441279 (Hyaluronic Acid Versus Platelet Lysate in The Treatment of Temporomandibular Joint Anterior Disc Displacement With Reduction), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Hyaluronic Acid Versus Platelet Lysate in The Treatment of Temporomandibular Joint Anterior Disc Displacement With Reduction: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of the study was to compare the clinical efficacy of Platelet Lysate (PL) versus Hyaluronic Acid (HA) after arthrocentesis in the management of patients with anterior disc displacement with reduction. This randomized clinical trial was conducted on 60 patients (17 males and 43 females) with anterior disc displacement with reduction confirmed with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The patients were split into two equal groups at random based on the type of treatment that was used. Group 1: arthrocentesis plus PL, Group 2 arthrocentesis plus HA. The pain intensity, clicking sound, maximum inter-incisal opening (MIO) and range of lateral mandibular excursions were measured. All the measured parameters were statistically analyzed. After 6 months, both groups demonstrated a significant improvement in all the parameters that were measured. The PL Group showed a statistically better resolution of clicking compared to HA Group with an Absolute Risk Difference of 33.3% (P < 0.05). The MIO between-group difference was 4.867 mm (P < 0.001), so exceeding the Minimum Clinically Important Difference (MCID). On the other hand, although the PL Group demonstrated statistical superiority in pain scores and range of lateral mandibular excursions (P < 0.05), the clinical magnitude of the between-group difference was modest. PL appears to be a safe and effective adjunctive intra-articular therapy after arthrocentesis for the management of patients with anterior disc displacement with reduction. It provides a clinical advantage over HA in resolving joint clicking and improving MIO. For pain reduction and range of lateral mandibular excursions, the therapeutic benefits of PL and HA are clinically comparable. Trial registration: On 4/12/2024, it was registered in Clinical-Trials.gov PRS ( https://register.clinicaltrials.gov ) with identification number NCT06441279.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42062696What 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.