Assessment of postoperative pain in patients undergoing temporomandibular joint arthroscopy with infiltration of dexamethasone disodium phosphate in different concentrations. A randomized controlled trial

Office-Based Arthroscopy Versus Arthrocentesis as Treatment for Temporomandibular Joint Pain and Dysfunction: Preliminary Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial

Background/Objectives: Arthroscopy and arthrocentesis are routinely performed for temporomandibular joint (TMJ) disorders, but high-quality evidence regarding their efficacy relative to each other is scarce. The current study, as part of an ongoing randomized controlled trial, aimed to compare office-based arthroscopic lysis and lavage with arthrocentesis for TMJ pain and dysfunction. Methods: Adults (≥18 years old) referred to a tertiary care hospital with TMJ arthralgia were included. The exclusion criteria comprised systemic rheumatic disease, connective tissue disease, bony ankylosis, congenital or acquired dentofacial deformities, a history of significant jaw trauma, or systemic illnesses. The primary outcome was joint pain during mandibular movement/function (visual analog scale (VAS); 0-100 mm). The secondary outcomes included pain at rest (VAS), maximum mouth opening (mm), maximum mouth opening without increased pain (mm), protrusive and lateral movements (mm), joint noises (absent/present), and mandibular function (mandibular function impairment questionnaire score). The outcomes were registered at baseline and 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-ups. Linear mixed models and mixed-effects logistic regressions were utilized to evaluate the effects of interventions on the repeated outcome measurements. Results: Twenty subjects were randomly allocated to office-based arthroscopic lysis and lavage (n = 10) or arthrocentesis (n = 10). Multivariable mixed-effects models showed significantly higher pain scores during mandibular movement/function in the arthrocentesis group compared with arthroscopy (22.42 mm (95% CI: 5.28 to 39.57); p = 0.011). The secondary outcomes were not significantly different between the interventions. Conclusions: The preliminary results show the superiority of office-based arthroscopy over arthrocentesis in reducing pain during mandibular movement/function over a follow-up period of 1 year while showing no differences between interventions regarding other study outcomes.

Causal Relationship Between Autoimmune Arthritis and Temporomandibular Disorders

OBJECTIVE

Accumulating evidence has indicated a close interrelation between autoimmune arthritis (AA) and temporomandibular disorders (TMD), but the causality is still unclear. The study aimed to explore the causal inference between AA and TMD using a bidirectional Mendelian randomization analysis.

METHODS

Online genome-wide association study data on rheumatoid arthritis (RA), ankylosing spondylitis (AS), psoriatic arthritis, and TMD were obtained from the FinnGen and IEU databases. Causality was using the inverse variance-weighted method as the primary analysis and supplemented by other methods. Sensitivity analyses, including heterogeneity tests, horizontal pleiotropy tests, and leave-one-out methods, were conducted to investigate the stability and reliability of the results.

RESULTS

The inverse variance-weighted test indicated that several AA types could causally increase the TMD risk, including overall RA (odds ratio [OR] = 1.348, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.1232-1.618, P = .001), subtype nRA (OR = 1.118, 95% CI = 1.044-1.197, P = .001), and AS (OR = 1.060, 95% CI = 1.024-1.097, P = .001). Moreover, the causal association of the above combinations has been proven to be stable and reliable using sensitivity and other tests.

CONCLUSION

These findings suggest that RA and AS might be causally associated with an increased risk of TMD. However, more studies are needed to check the causal effects of AA on TMD and analyse the potential mechanisms further.

Update on Evidence and Directions in Temporomandibular Joint Injection Techniques: A Rapid Review of Primary Research

This rapid review summarizes the latest primary research in temporomandibular joint (TMJ) injection treatment. The final literature searches were conducted on 4 January 2024. Selection was performed systematically following predefined eligibility criteria. Randomized control trials concerning the treatment of TMJ disorders with intra-articular injections were included. Studies on more invasive interventions were excluded. Quality of life, joint pain and range of mandibular mobility were assessed. Ultimately, 12 studies covering a total of 603 patients qualified. They concerned: (1) arthrocentesis (AC) and the administration of, (2) injectable platelet-rich fibrin (I-PRF), (3) platelet-rich plasma (PRP), (4) hyaluronic acid (HA), (5) non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and (6) hypertonic dextrose (HD) with a local anesthetic. The dominant approach was to perform arthrocentesis before administering the appropriate injection substance (I-PRF, PRP, HA, or NSAID). Two current studies on the intra-articular administration of NSAIDs, specifically tenoxicam and piroxicam, are noteworthy. A mixture of PRP and HA was injected in another two trials. These two innovative approaches may prove to be significant directions for further research on injection treatment of TMJs.

Analysis of the Use of Sample Size and Effect Size Calculations in a Temporomandibular Disorders Randomised Controlled Trial-Short Narrative Review

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Temporomandibular disorder (TMD) is the term used to describe a pathology (dysfunction and pain) in the masticatory muscles and temporomandibular joint (TMJ). There is an apparent upward trend in the publication of dental research and a need to continually improve the quality of research. Therefore, this study was conducted to analyse the use of sample size and effect size calculations in a TMD randomised controlled trial.

METHODS

The period was restricted to the full 5 years, i.e., papers published in 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, and 2023. The filter article type-"Randomized Controlled Trial" was used. The studies were graded on a two-level scale: 0-1. In the case of 1, sample size (SS) and effect size (ES) were calculated.

RESULTS

In the entire study sample, SS was used in 58% of studies, while ES was used in 15% of studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Quality should improve as research increases. One factor that influences quality is the level of statistics. SS and ES calculations provide a basis for understanding the results obtained by the authors. Access to formulas, online calculators and software facilitates these analyses. High-quality trials provide a solid foundation for medical progress, fostering the development of personalized therapies that provide more precise and effective treatment and increase patients' chances of recovery. Improving the quality of TMD research, and medical research in general, helps to increase public confidence in medical advances and raises the standard of patient care.

Arthroscopy versus arthrocentesis and versus conservative treatments for temporomandibular joint disorders: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

The aim of this systematic review was to assess the efficacy of arthroscopy compared to arthrocentesis and to conservative treatments for temporomandibular joint disorders. Thirteen controlled studies on various patient outcomes were included after a systematic search in seven electronic databases. Meta-analyses were conducted separately for arthroscopic surgery (AS) and arthroscopic lysis and lavage (ALL), and short-term (<6 months), intermediate-term (6 months to 5 years), and long-term (≥5 years) follow-up periods were considered. No significant differences in pain reduction and complication rates were found between AS or ALL and arthrocentesis. Regarding improvement in maximum mouth opening (MMO), both AS at intermediate-term and ALL at short-term follow-up were equally efficient when compared to arthrocentesis. However, at intermediate-term follow-up, ALL was superior to arthrocentesis for MMO improvement (mean difference 4.9 mm, 95% confidence interval 2.7-7.1 mm). Trial sequential analysis supported the conclusion of the meta-analysis for MMO improvement for ALL versus arthrocentesis studies at intermediate-term follow-up, but not for the other meta-analyses. Insufficient evidence exists to draw conclusions regarding other patient outcomes or about comparisons between arthroscopy and conservative treatments. Due to the low quality of the primary studies, further research is warranted before final conclusions can be drawn regarding the management of temporomandibular joint disorders.