Comparative study of arthrocentesis with concentric-needle cannula with classic concentric needle: A randomized single-blind controlled clinical trial

Abstract

This study aimed to assess and compare the efficacy of two distinct single-puncture techniques in temporomandibular joint (TMJ) arthrocentesis for managing disk displacement without reduction (DDwoR).Sixty patients with DDwoR were randomly and blindly assigned to two treatment groups (n = 30 each): group 1 — TMJ arthrocentesis with the classic concentric needle; and group 2 — TMJ arthrocentesis with the concentric needle-cannula system. The following variables were recorded and compared across the groups: patient's pain perception (visual analog scale — VAS, 0–10); maximal interincisal distance (MID, mm); facial edema (FE, presence or absence); and operation duration (OP, minutes).Patients in group 2 presented significantly lower values of VAS score and presence of FE (p < 0.05) when examining the data at 24 and 48 h after the arthrocentesis. They also showed an increase in MID values (p = 0.024) after 6 months. With regard to OP, no significant difference was observed between the groups.Performing a single-puncture TMJ arthrocentesis using a concentric needle-cannula system significantly reduced the patients’ pain perception, and mitigated the presence of facial edema during the immediate postoperative period (at 24 and 48 h). Furthermore, it resulted in a notable increase in the MID after 6 months.