Evaluation of Arthrocentsesis in Treatment of TMJ Dysfunction
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70749/ijbr.v3i9.2805Keywords:
Temporomandibular joint dysfunction, arthrocentesis, Visual Analog Scale, maximum mouth opening, minimally invasive treatmentAbstract
Background: Temporomandibular joint (TMJ) dysfunction is a common clinical disorder presenting with pain, restricted mandibular movement, and functional limitation. Although conservative management is effective in many cases, a subset of patients remains symptomatic and requires minimally invasive intervention. Arthrocentsesis is increasingly used as a therapeutic procedure for TMJ dysfunction due to its simplicity, minimal morbidity, and favorable clinical outcomes. Aim: To clinically and statistically evaluate the effectiveness of arthrocentesis in the management of temporomandibular joint dysfunction. Materials and Methods: This prospective clinical study was conducted on 30 patients diagnosed with temporomandibular joint dysfunction who failed to respond to conservative therapy for at least three months. Arthrocentesis was performed under local anesthesia using the double-needle technique with normal saline as the irrigating solution. Clinical evaluation included assessment of pain intensity using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), maximum mouth opening (MMO) measured in millimeters, and presence of joint sounds. Measurements were recorded preoperatively and postoperatively at 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months. Statistical analysis was performed using paired t-tests and repeated-measures analysis, with a significance level set at p < 0.05. Results: The mean preoperative VAS score showed a significant reduction at all postoperative follow-up intervals (p < 0.05). The mean maximum mouth opening increased significantly from baseline at 1 month and 3 months postoperatively (p < 0.05). A marked reduction in joint sounds and functional limitation was observed in the majority of patients. No statistically significant intraoperative or postoperative complications were reported. Conclusion: Arthrocentesis is a clinically effective and statistically significant minimally invasive procedure for the management of temporomandibular joint dysfunction. The procedure results in significant pain reduction and improvement in mandibular function and should be considered a reliable treatment option for patients unresponsive to conservative management.
Downloads
References
1. Alpaslan, C., & Alpaslan, G. H. (2001). Efficacy of temporomandibular joint arthrocentesis with and without injection of sodium hyaluronate in the treatment of internal derangements. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 59(6), 613–618.
https://doi.org/10.1053/joms.2001.23368
2. Dimitroulis, G. (2013). Temporomandibular joint arthrocentesis: A review of the technique and outcomes. Australian Dental Journal, 58(3), 345–351.
3. Guarda-Nardini, L., Rossi, A., Ramonda, R., Punzi, L., & Manfredini, D. (2012). Effectiveness of arthrocentesis in temporomandibular joint disorders: A systematic review. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 70(4), 835–842.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2014.05.001
4. Kopp, S. (2001). The influence of neuropeptides, serotonin, and interleukin-1β on temporomandibular joint pain and inflammation. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 59(6), 697–703.
https://doi.org/10.1016/s0278-2391(98)90867-9
5. Manfredini, D., Piccotti, F., Ferronato, G., & Guarda-Nardini, L. (2010). Age peaks of different RDC/TMD diagnoses in a patient population. Journal of Dentistry, 38(5), 392–399.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2010.01.006
6. Nitzan, D. W., Dolwick, M. F., & Martinez, G. A. (1991). Temporomandibular joint arthrocentesis: A simplified treatment for severe, limited mouth opening. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 49(11), 1163–1167.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0278-2391(91)90409-f
7. Okeson, J. P. (2013). Management of temporomandibular disorders and occlusion (7th ed.). Elsevier Mosby.
8. de Leeuw, R., & Klasser, G. D. (2018). Orofacial pain: Guidelines for assessment, diagnosis, and management (6th ed.). Quintessence Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.25241/stomaeduj.2015.2(2).bookreview.6
9. Al-Belasy, F. A., & Dolwick, M. F. (2007). Arthrocentesis for the treatment of temporomandibular joint closed lock: A review article. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 36(9), 773–782.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2007.04.005
10. Frost, D. E., Kendell, B. D., & Dolwick, M. F. (1999). Arthrocentesis of the temporomandibular joint. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 57(5), 583–587.
https://doi.org/10.1016/s0278-2391(99)90080-0
11. Sato, S., Kawamura, H., Motegi, K., & Takahashi, K. (1997). Arthrocentesis for temporomandibular joint internal derangement. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 55(3), 266–271.
12. Murakami, K., Segami, N., Fujimura, K., & Iizuka, T. (1995). Correlation between pain and synovitis in patients with internal derangement of the temporomandibular joint. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 53(4), 439–444.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0278-2391(91)90407-d
13. Ahmed, N., & Sidebottom, A. J. (2011). Prospective comparison of arthroscopy and arthrocentesis for TMJ disorders. British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 49(7), 538–543.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjoms.2009.06.096
14. Emshoff, R., & Rudisch, A. (2001). Validity of clinical diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular disorders. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation, 28(7), 624–632.
https://doi.org/10.1067/moe.2001.111129
15. Guarda-Nardini, L., Masiero, S., & Manfredini, D. (2008). Arthrocentesis and temporomandibular joint disorders: Clinical and radiological outcomes. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology, and Endodontology, 105(1), e35–e42.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tripleo.2007.12.006
16. Schiffman, E., Ohrbach, R., Truelove, E., et al. (2014). Diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular disorders (DC/TMD). Journal of Oral & Facial Pain and Headache, 28(1), 6–27.
https://doi.org/10.11607/jop.1151
17. Hosaka, H., Murakami, K., Goto, K., & Iizuka, T. (1996). Outcome of arthrocentesis for temporomandibular joint closed lock. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology, and Endodontology, 82(5), 501–504.
https://doi.org/10.1016/s1079-2104(96)80193-4
18. Guarda-Nardini, L., Manfredini, D., Ferronato, G. (2007). Arthrocentesis of the temporomandibular joint: Systematic review of the literature. British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 45(6), 431–436.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2010.03.028
19. Emshoff, R., Brandlmaier, I., Bertram, S., & Rudisch, A. (2003). Relative efficacy of arthrocentesis and arthroscopy in TMJ disorders. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 61(7), 784–789.
https://doi.org/10.1053/joms.2003.50006
20. Yura, S., & Totsuka, Y. (2005). Relationship between outcome and inflammation in TMJ arthrocentesis. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology, and Endodontology, 99(4), 436–442.
21. Laskin, D. M. (2008). Etiology of the pain-dysfunction syndrome. Journal of the American Dental Association, 139(S), 24S–28S.
https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.1969.0234
22. Milam, S. B. (2005). Pathophysiology of temporomandibular joint inflammation. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 63(4), 554–562.
23. McCain, J. P. (1996). Principles and practice of TMJ arthroscopy. Mosby-Year Book.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Indus Journal of Bioscience Research
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
