The objective of this study was to compare, through a systematic review with a meta-analysis, the relative risks of arthroscopy and arthrocentesis in the temporomandibular joint. MEDLINE/PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane Library (CENTRAL), Web of Science, SCOPUS were the researched databases, as well as grey literature and manual searches. The search results showed 656 studies, but only five met the eligibility criteria. The evaluation included 194 joints (104 patients): 101 were arthroscopy and 93 arthrocentesis. Complications were observed in four patients undergoing arthroscopy (two with temporary facial paralysis and two with prolonged cervical oedema) and in three patients undergoing arthrocentesis (two with severe bradycardia and one with prolonged cervical oedema). The meta-analysis demonstrated a relative risk of 0.99 for complications after arthroscopy compared with arthrocentesis, but the results showed no statistical differences. In conclusion, this systematic review suggests that there is no increased risk of complications with arthroscopy than arthrocentesis. When complications were present, they were temporary.
No clinical trial protocols linked to this paper
Clinical trials are automatically linked when NCT numbers are found in the paper's title or abstract.PICO Elements
No PICO elements extracted yet. Click "Extract PICO" to analyze this paper.
Paper Details
MeSH Terms
Associated Data
No associated datasets or code repositories found for this paper.
Related Papers
Related paper suggestions will be available in future updates.