Prospective study to evaluate the influence of joint washing and the use of hyaluronic acid on 111 arthrocentesis
Temporomandibular dysfunction is a generic term that covers a large number of clinical problems affecting not only temporomandibular joint but also the masticatory musculature and related structures. Arthrocentesis is used in patients with joint pathology in which conservative treatment has failed.
A prospective, observational, analytical cohort study has been carried out to evaluate the results of 111 arthrocentesis. We have performed an inferential statistics study between the variables: improvement of pain and improvement in the oral opening with the variables and access joint, washing joint, hyaluronic acid infiltration, and type of joint pathology.
Joint washing and intra-articular hyaluronic acid injection significantly improved the pain at 1-week, 1-month, and 3-month postarthrocentesis, although this improvement was limited in time, at 6 months, joint washing and hyaluronic acid infiltration are no longer significant. Only the joint access (p = 0.014) and the type of joint pathology (p = 0.028) are significant.
The effectiveness of joint access in the arthrocentesis at 6 months is high, although less than at 1-month and 3-month postarthrocentesis. The type of joint pathology is another important factor. Patients with degenerative pathology worsen the most after 6-month postarthrocentesis. Arthrocentesis could avoid the evolution of acute pathology.
KeywordsTemporomandibular joint dysfunction Arthrocentesis Access temporomandibular joint Lavage temporomandibular joint Hyaluronic infiltration
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. This article was approved by University Hospital Miguel Servet review board of Zaragoza.
An informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- 1.Kaplan AS, Assael LA (1991) Temporomandibular disorders. Diagnosis and treatment, 1st edn. Saunders, Estados UnidosGoogle Scholar
- 3.Navarro Vila C (2004) Patología quirúrgica de la articulación temporomandibular: transtornos funcionales. In: Navarro Vila C, García Marín F, Ochandiano Caicoya S (eds) Tratado de Cirugía Oral y Maxilofacial. Arán, Madrid, pp 266–277Google Scholar
- 4.Schiffman E, Ohrbach R, Truelove E, Look J, Anderson G, Goulet J et al (2014) Diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular disorders (DC/TMD) for clinical and research applications: recommendations of the international RDC/TMD consortium network and orofacial pain special interest group. J Oral Facial Pain Headache 1(28):6–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Chandrashekhar V, Kenchappa U, Chinnannavar S, Singh S (2015) Arthrocentesis a minimally invasive method for TMJ disc disorders - a prospective study. J Clin Diagn Res 9(10):59–62Google Scholar
- 14.Alpaslan G, Alpaslan C (2001) Efficacy of temporomandibular joint arthrocentesis with and without injection of sodium hyaluronate in treatment of internal derangements. J OralMaxillofac Surg 59(6):613–618Google Scholar
- 15.Guarda-Nardini L, Rossi A, Arboretti R, Bonnini S, Stellini E (2015) Single- or multiple-session viscosupplementation protocols for temporomandibular joint degenerative disorders: a randomized clinical trial. J OralRehabil 42(7):521–528Google Scholar
- 20.Gorrela H, Prameela J, Srinivas G, Reddy B, Sudhir M, Arakeri G (2017) Efficacy of temporomandibular joint arthrocentesis with sodium hyaluronate in the management of temporomandibular joint disorders: a prospective randomized control trial. J Maxillofac Oral Surg 4(16):479–484CrossRefGoogle Scholar