Ultrasound-guided vs conventional arthrocentesis for management of temporomandibular joint disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Yingshun Hu, Xiao Zhang, Siyan Liu, Feng Xu
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare outcomes between ultrasound (US)-guided arthrocentesis and conventional arthrocentesis for the management of temporomandibular joint disorders (TMDs). METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, BioMed Central, CENTRAL, and Google scholar databases were searched up to April 1 2020 for randomized control trials (RCTs) comparing US-guided and conventional arthrocentesis. RESULTS: Four RCTs were included. Pooled analysis did not demonstrate any statistically significant difference in pain or maximal mouth opening (MMO) scores after 1 week and 1 month of follow-up between US-guided and conventional arthrocentesis. Studies also reported data on intra-operative needle relocations and operating time but with conflicting results. CONCLUSION: This study indicates that the use of US during arthrocentesis may not improve postoperative pain and MMO in the short term. Data on intra-operative outcomes are scarce and conflicting for any definitive conclusions. Further high-quality adequately powered RCTs are required to strengthen current evidence.