Efficacy of Acrylic Splint in Management of Internal Derangement of Temperomandibular Joint

Treatments for painful temporomandibular disc displacement with reduction: a network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

There is currently no consensus on the best treatment for painful temporomandibular disc displacement with reduction (DDwR), and no network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing all types of treatment for this condition has been conducted. The objective of this study was to compare and rank all treatments for DDwR, including conservative treatments, occlusal splints, low-level laser therapy (LLLT), manual therapy, no treatment (control), arthrocentesis (Arthro) alone, Arthro plus intra-articular injection of platelet-rich plasma (Arthro-PRP) or hyaluronic acid (Arthro-HA), and Arthro plus occlusal splint. Predictor variables were pain intensity and maximum mouth opening (MMO). The mean difference with 95% confidence interval was estimated using Stata software. The GRADE system was used to assess the certainty of the evidence. Twenty RCTs reporting 1107 patients were identified in the literature search; 980 of these patients were included in the network meta-analysis. Direct meta-analysis showed that Arthro-PRP significantly reduced pain intensity compared to Arthro alone, while occlusal splint and manual therapy were superior to conservative treatment (all very low quality evidence). Arthro with intra-articular injection of PRP/HA ranked as the most effective treatment in terms of pain reduction, whereas LLLT ranked the best choice for increasing MMO for patients with DDwR. However, it is important to note that the evidence for the superiority of these treatments is generally of very low quality. Therefore, further high-quality research is needed to confirm these findings and provide more reliable recommendations for the treatment of DDwR.

Efficacy of occlusal splints in the treatment of temporomandibular disorders: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review aimed to assess the efficacy of occlusal splints in the treatment of temporomandibular disorders (TMDs).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This systematic review was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Four databases (Medline via Pubmed, Web of Science, Embase and Scopus) were searched, the last search was conducted on April 2020. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) employing the Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (DC/TMD) or Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC/TMD) as diagnostic criteria and including occlusal splint as one of the experimental groups were included in the present study. The data from the included studies were extracted and assessed for risk of bias.

RESULTS

Eleven studies were included. The sample size ranged from 12 to 96 subjects. The male to female ratio was 0 to 25%. The mean length of follow-up was 4 months. Occlusal splint had a positive effect on mandibular movements in all included studies. Seven studies showed a positive effect of occlusal splint on chronic pain reduction and pain intensity, while two others showed improvement of temporomandibular joint clicking sounds and locking of the jaws. Moreover, improvements in mouth opening, depression, and anxiety symptoms, were reported in four studies.

CONCLUSIONS

An occlusal splint can be considered as a non-invasive treatment approach for patients with TMD, especially those with signs and symptoms of restriction of mandibular movement and pain. Moreover, the present findings highlighted an urgent need of a standardised consensus regarding the prognostic evaluation of TMD.

No evidence on the effectiveness of oral splints for the management of temporomandibular joint dysfunction pain in both short and long-term follow-up systematic reviews and meta-analysis studies

The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of oral splints in reducing the intensity of pain in patients with temporomandibular joint dysfunction in both short and long-term treatment durations. Electronic databases, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE via PubMed, Web of Science, Egyptian Knowledge Bank, and EMBASE were searched for randomized controlled trials comparing different types of splints to non-occluding splints, behavioral therapy, pharmacotherapy, counseling, and no treatment. The risk of bias was assessed by using Cochrane risk of bias recommendations. Fixed and random effects were used to summarize the outcomes. The effect estimates were expressed as standardized mean differences (SMD) or risk ratios with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Subgroup analyses were carried out according to the treatment duration. Twenty-two studies met the inclusion criteria. A meta-analysis of short-term studies up to three months revealed no significant difference between the study groups. However, long-term studies exhibited a significant difference in pain reduction in favor of the control group. Total analysis revealed that the control group resulted in significant pain reduction (SMD 0.14, 95% CI 0.05-0.23, P=0.002, I²=0%). Oral splints are not effective in reducing pain intensity or improving function in patients with temporomandibular joint dysfunction.