Comparison of ultrasound-guided and conventional arthrocentesis of the temporomandibular joint

  • Mustan Barıs Sivri
    Affiliations
    Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Marmara University, Marmara Üniversitesi Başıbüyük Sağlık Yerleşkesi, Maltepe, Istanbul, Turkey
    Search for articles by this author
  • Yasar Ozkan
    Affiliations
    Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Marmara University, Marmara Üniversitesi Başıbüyük Sağlık Yerleşkesi, Maltepe, Istanbul, Turkey
    Search for articles by this author
  • Filiz Namdar Pekiner
    Affiliations
    Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Marmara University, Marmara Üniversitesi Başıbüyük Sağlık Yerleşkesi, Maltepe, Istanbul, Turkey
    Search for articles by this author
  • Gokhan Gocmen
    Correspondence
    Corresponding author at: Marmara Üniversitesi Başıbüyük Sağlık Yerleşkesi, Maltepe, Istanbul, Turkey. Tel.: (+90)505 593 31 39; Fax: (+90) 212 2465244.
    Affiliations
    Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Marmara University, Marmara Üniversitesi Başıbüyük Sağlık Yerleşkesi, Maltepe, Istanbul, Turkey
    Search for articles by this author

      Abstract

      Arthrocentesis of the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) can be done either conventionally or under ultrasonographic guidance, and we have compared the effectiveness of the two techniques. Twenty patients who required arthrocentesis of the TMJ were randomly assigned to ultrasonographically guided (US-guided) and conservative arthrocentesis (n = 10 in each group). The number of relocations of the first and second punctures, pain experienced during each procedure measured using a visual analogue scale (VAS), and the duration of the procedure were the main outcome variables. The pain score compared with the maximal interincisal mouth opening measured preoperatively, immediately after operation, at 1 week, and 1 and 3 months, were secondary outcome variables. No patient in either group developed a complication, and there was no significant difference between the two groups, except that US-guided arthrocentesis took significantly longer than the conventional technique (p = 0.000). US-guided arthrocentesis of the TMJ was no more successful than the conventional technique, and took longer. Further studies with more patients are required to validate these findings.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      References

        • Manfredini D.
        • Bonnini S.
        • Arboretti R.
        • et al.
        Temporomandibular joint osteoarthritis: an open label trial of 76 patients treated with arthrocentesis plus hyaluronic acid injections.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009; 38: 827-834
        • Monje-Gil F.
        • Nitzan D.
        • González-Garcia R.
        Temporomandibular joint arthrocentesis. Review of the literature.
        Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2012; 17: 575-581
        • Tozoglu S.
        • Al-Belasy F.A.
        • Dolwick M.F.
        A review of techniques of lysis and lavage of the TMJ.
        Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011; 49: 302-309
        • Fritz J.
        • Thomas C.
        • Tzaribachev N.
        • et al.
        MRI-guided injection procedures of the temporomandibular joints in children and adults: Technique, accuracy, and safety.
        AJR. 2009; 193: 1148-1154
        • Dayisoylu E.H.
        • Cifci E.
        • Uckan S.
        Ultrasound-guided arthrocentesis of the temporomandibular joint.
        Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013; 51: 667-668
        • Weedon S.
        • Ahmed N.
        • Sidebottom A.J.
        Prospective assessment of outcomes following disposable arthroscopy of the temporomandibular joint.
        Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013; 51: 625-629
        • Wiler J.L.
        • Costantino T.G.
        • Filippone L.
        • et al.
        Comparison of ultrasound-guided and standard landmark techniques for knee arthrocentesis.
        J Emerg Med. 2010; 39: 76-82
        • Sibbitt Jr., W.L.
        • Chavez-Chiang N.R.
        • Delea S.L.
        • et al.
        Does ultrasound guidance improve the outcomes of arthrocentesis and corticosteroid injection of the knee?.
        Scand J Rheumatol. 2012; 41: 66-72
        • Wilkes C.H.
        Internal derangements of the temporomandibular joint. Pathological variations.
        Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1989; 115: 469-477
        • Nitzan D.W.
        • Dolwick M.F.
        • Martinez G.A.
        Temporomandibular joint arthrocentesis: a simplified treatment for severe, limited mouth opening.
        J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1991; 49: 1163-1167
        • Fritz J.
        • Pereira P.L.
        • Lewin J.S.
        Temporomandibular joint injections: interventional MR imaging demonstrates anatomical landmark approach to be inaccurate when compared to direct visualization of the injectant.
        Pediatr Radiol. 2010; 40: 1964-1965
        • Honda K.
        • Bjørnland T.
        Image guided treatment: Image-guided puncture technique for the superior temporomandibular joint space: value of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT).
        Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2006; 102: 281-286
        • Matsumoto K.
        • Bjørnland T.
        • Kai Y.
        • et al.
        An image-guided technique for puncture of the superior temporomandibular joint cavity: Clinical comparison with the conventional puncture technique.
        Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2011; 111: 641-648
        • Bissoli E.
        • Bison L.
        • Gioulis E.
        • et al.
        Multislice CT fluoroscopy: technical principles, clinical applications and dosimetry.
        Radiol Med. 2003; 106 (in English and Italian): 201-212
        • Larheim T.A.
        • Abrahamsson A.K.
        • Kristensen M.
        • et al.
        Temporomandibular joint diagnostics using CBCT.
        Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2015; 44 (20140235)
        • Cunnington J.
        • Marshall N.
        • Hide G.
        • et al.
        A randomized, double-blind, controlled study of ultrasound-guided corticosteroid injection into the joint of patients with inflammatory arthritis.
        Arthritis Rheum. 2010; 62: 1862-1869