Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons · 2020
Is Single-Puncture TMJ Arthrocentesis Superior to the Double-Puncture Technique for the Improvement of Outcomes in Patients With TMDs?
СтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Monteiro João Luiz Gomes Carneiro, de Arruda José Alcides Almeida, Silva Emanuel Dias de Oliveira E, Vasconcelos Belmiro Cavalcanti do Egito
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Arthrocentesis is a common treatment for temporomandibular joint disorders. Although modifications of the standard double-puncture technique have been described, no consensus has been reached regarding which is the best. The aim of the present study was to compare the outcomes of the single- and double-puncture arthrocentesis techniques (SPT and DPT, respectively).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review following the PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses) guidelines was performed. Two independent reviewers conducted electronic searches in the MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases for relevant studies reported up to January 2019. Studies comparing type I SPT (only 1 cannula) or type II SPT (2 soldered cannulas) to conventional DPT were considered. Data regarding the maximal mouth opening (MMO), joint pain, and operative time were extracted for the meta-analysis. In the case of statistically significant heterogeneity (P < .10), a random effects model was used to assess the significance of the treatment effects. Otherwise, a fixed effects model was used. The included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were assessed for methodologic quality using the Cochrane Collaboration tool.
RESULTS: Nine studies were included for qualitative synthesis. Two were suitable for quantitative synthesis per outcome. The meta-analysis did not find any differences between SPT and DPT in relation to the MMO. However, in relation to joint pain, the results slightly favored the use of DPT. No differences in operative time were found between type I SPT and DPT (P = .49).
CONCLUSIONS: The present study found no differences between the SPT and DPT in relation to the MMO, and no difference was found in operative time between the DPT and type I SPT. Because of the heterogeneity between studies, it might be interesting to conduct more homogeneous RCTs to elucidate which technique results in better clinical outcomes.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review following the PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses) guidelines was performed. Two independent reviewers conducted electronic searches in the MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases for relevant studies reported up to January 2019. Studies comparing type I SPT (only 1 cannula) or type II SPT (2 soldered cannulas) to conventional DPT were considered. Data regarding the maximal mouth opening (MMO), joint pain, and operative time were extracted for the meta-analysis. In the case of statistically significant heterogeneity (P < .10), a random effects model was used to assess the significance of the treatment effects. Otherwise, a fixed effects model was used. The included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were assessed for methodologic quality using the Cochrane Collaboration tool.
RESULTS: Nine studies were included for qualitative synthesis. Two were suitable for quantitative synthesis per outcome. The meta-analysis did not find any differences between SPT and DPT in relation to the MMO. However, in relation to joint pain, the results slightly favored the use of DPT. No differences in operative time were found between type I SPT and DPT (P = .49).
CONCLUSIONS: The present study found no differences between the SPT and DPT in relation to the MMO, and no difference was found in operative time between the DPT and type I SPT. Because of the heterogeneity between studies, it might be interesting to conduct more homogeneous RCTs to elucidate which technique results in better clinical outcomes.