Temporomandibular joint prosthesis as treatment option for mandibular condyle fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis

E T Niezen*, B van Minnen, R R M Bos, P U Dijkstra

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articleAcademicpeer-review

4 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review of the literature on the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) prosthesis as a treatment option after mandibular condyle fracture. Three databases were searched (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library) and 2670 unique papers were identified. A total of 337 studies were included (121 case reports, 89 case series, and 127 cohort/clinical studies). In total 14,396 patients and 21,560 prostheses were described. Of the 127 cohort or clinical studies, 100 (79%) reported inclusion criteria, 54 (43%) reported exclusion criteria, and 96 (76%) reported the inclusion period. The base population from which patients were recruited was reported in 57 studies (45%). The reason for TMJ prosthesis implantation was reported for 4177 patients (29.0%). A history of condylar fracture was present in 83 patients (2.0%); a history of mandibular trauma was present in 580 patients (13.9%). The meta-analysis showed a pooled prevalence of condylar fracture of 1.6% (95% confidence interval 0.9-2.4%) and a pooled prevalence of trauma or condylar fracture of 11.3% (95% confidence interval 7.1-16.0%). Heterogeneity was highly significant (P < 0.001). The TMJ prosthesis appears to be reserved for patients with persistent pain, bony or fibrous ankylosis, or osteomyelitis after primary closed or open treatment of fractures of the mandibular condyle.

Original languageEnglish
JournalInternational Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 23-Jun-2022

Cite this