WITHDRAWN: Hyaluronate for temporomandibular joint disorders

Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, State Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases, West China College of Stomatology, Sichuan University, No. 14, Section Three, Ren Min Nan Road, Chengdu, Sichuan, China, 610041.
Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) (Impact Factor: 6.03). 10/2013; 10(10):CD002970. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002970.pub2
Source: PubMed


There is insufficient evidence to either support or refute the use of hyaluronate for treating patients with temporomandibular joint disorders. When the joint between lower jaw and the base of the skull is not working well it can led to movement problems, noises (clicking or grating), muscle spasms or pain (temporomandibular joint disorders (TMD)). Arthritis can also affect the joint. A range of treatment options are available including the injection of substances such as glucocorticoids or hyaluronate into the joint. Hyaluronate is sometimes used for osteoarthritis of the knees or hips. The review found that there is not enough evidence to judge whether hyaluronate injections into the joint are helpful for people with TMD. Reported side-effects were mild and transient. No data on quality of life were reported.

Download full-text


Available from: Zongdao Shi, Nov 22, 2015
  • Source
    • "Even though the IAHA has been used for nearly two decades, the clinical effectiveness of the treatment has not been reviewed and summarized in the form of systematic review until the one published by Shi et al in 2003 39 . The authors concluded that there is insufficient evidence to support or refute the use of hyaluronate for treatment of TMD, and that further high quality RCT's on the use of hyaluronic acid need to be conducted before firm conclusions with regard to its effectiveness can be drawn. "

  • Source
    • "Shi et al. [110] assessed the effectiveness of intra-articular injection of hyaluronate both alone and in combination with other remedies on temporomandibular joint disorders. Seven studies were included in the review; three studies, including 109 patients with TMDs, compared hyaluronate with placebo; 2 studies (n = 71) reported long-term effects (three months or longer). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This review explores the aetiology of temporomandibular disorders and discusses the controversies in variable treatment modalities. Pathologies of the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) and its' associated muscles of mastication are jointly termed temporomandibular disorders (TMDs). TMDs present with a variety of symptoms which include pain in the joint and its surrounding area, jaw clicking, limited jaw opening and headaches. It is mainly reported by middle aged females who tend to recognize the symptoms more readily than males and therefore more commonly seek professional help. Several aetiological factors have been acknowledged including local trauma, bruxism, malocclusion, stress and psychiatric illnesses. The Research Diagnostic Criteria of the Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC/TMD) is advanced to other criteria as it takes into consideration the socio-psychological status of the patient. Several treatment modalities have been recommended including homecare practices, splint therapy, occlusal adjustment, analgesics and the use of psychotropic medication; as well as surgery, supplementary therapy and cognitive behavioural therapy. Although splint therapy and occlusal adjustment have been extensively used, there is no evidence to suggest that they can be curative; a number of evidence-based trials have concluded that these appliances should not be suggested as part of the routine care. Surgery, except in very rare cases, is discouraged since it is the most invasive alternative; recent studies have shown healthier outcome with cognitive behavioural therapy.
    International Archives of Medicine 02/2008; 1(1):23. DOI:10.1186/1755-7682-1-23 · 1.08 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although systematic reviews are the backbone of evidence-based dentistry, they have appeared infrequently in the clinical dental literature and their importance may not be recognized by dentists. The authors describe the steps taken in systematic reviews and perform a literature survey to identify published systematic reviews of topics relevant to clinical dentistry. The authors searched MEDLINE and the Cochrane databases of systematic reviews and abstracts of reviews of effectiveness, as well as identified reviews that were known to the authors but not found in the searches. Systematic reviews included in this survey stated the intention to identify all relevant articles within predefined limitations, applied defined exclusion and inclusion criteria, and presented complete raw or synthesized data from included studies. This literature survey identified 131 systematic reviews, 96 of which had direct clinical relevance. During the past 14 years, clinically relevant systematic reviews have been published with increasing frequency. These reviews vary in the types of studies included and the assessment of those studies. The results of the reviews also varied in their definitiveness, with 17 percent finding the evidence to be insufficient to answer the key question. An additional 50 percent of the 96 reviews hedged in answering the key question, by noting that the supporting evidence was weak in quality or limited in quantity. The number of systematic reviews that address clinical topics in dentistry is small but growing. However, the authors of more than one-half of these reviews believed that the evidence available to answer the key question was not strong. As systematic reviews continue to grow, dentistry will become better informed about the adequacy and congruence of the scientific evidence underpinning clinical practice.
    Journal of the American Dental Association (1939) 05/2004; 135(4):464-73. DOI:10.14219/jada.archive.2004.0212 · 2.01 Impact Factor
Show more