Temporomandibular joint arthrocentesis: outcomes under intravenous sedation versus general anesthesia.

PURPOSE: Although arthrocentesis of the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) has been shown to be an effective, minimally invasive surgical procedure, there is a paucity of literature that has examined its effectiveness under intravenous (IV) sedation compared with general anesthesia (GA) with a secure airway.

PATIENTS AND

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patients with TMJ arthrocentesis was performed. Patients were divided into 2 groups based on type of anesthesia (sedation vs general) and location of surgery (office vs hospital). Visual analog scales were used to assess TMJ pain, headaches, jaw function, diet, and disability. Objective examinations were performed for maximum interincisal opening, lateral excursions, and TMJ sounds.

RESULTS

Statistical improvements were seen for TMJ pain, headaches, dietary restrictions, jaw function, and disability. Patients reported an 80% satisfaction rate for surgery under IV sedation compared with a 95% satisfaction rate of patients who had surgery under GA.

CONCLUSIONS

Arthrocentesis is effective for treatment of TMJ pain and acute closed-lock conditions irrespective of Wilkes classification (grades I to III). Ninety-five percent of patients reported immediate resolution or decrease of pain within the first postoperative week. Although the procedure is effective when performed under IV sedation in an office setup, superior clinical outcomes were noticed when the procedure was performed with a secure airway under GA.