Background/Objectives: Intra-articular injections are used for temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) resistant to conservative treatment. However, many reviews assess injectable agents combined with arthrocentesis or other co-interventions, limiting interpretation of their standalone effects. This overview aimed to summarize meta-analytic evidence on standalone intra-articular injections for temporomandibular joint disorders. Methods: MEDLINE, BASE, and Europe PMC were searched on 29 March 2026. Systematic reviews with quantitative meta-analyses evaluating standalone intra-articular TMJ injections were included. Data regarding injectable substances, clinical indications, and outcome domains were extracted and synthesized descriptively. Results: Three systematic reviews with meta-analyses were included. The evidence addressed platelet-rich plasma, corticosteroids, sodium hyaluronate, and physiological saline. Reported indications included degenerative joint disease, osteoarthritis, internal derangement, and arthritis. All included agents were reported to be associated with pain reduction. Conclusions: Meta-analytic evidence on standalone intra-articular injections for TMDs remains limited and heterogeneous. Available data suggest potential benefits, mainly for pain reduction, but do not establish clear superiority of any agent. The potential therapeutic activity of physiological saline should be considered when designing future injection trials.

Background/Objectives: Ultrasound is increasingly used to guide minimally invasive interventions for temporomandibular joint (TMJ) disorders because it enables real-time visualization of the joint, surrounding tissues, and needle position. This scoping review aimed to map and characterize the available evidence on ultrasound-guided minimally invasive interventions for temporomandibular disorders (TMDs). Methods: The review followed PRISMA-ScR guidelines and was registered in the Open Science Framework (osf.io/r42m5). PubMed/MEDLINE, BASE, and Europe PMC were searched up to 4 April 2026. Original clinical and technical studies evaluating ultrasound-guided minimally invasive interventions for TMDs were included. Results: Seventeen studies published between 2012 and 2026 met the eligibility criteria. Ultrasound guidance was used mainly for intra-articular injections, arthrocentesis, and botulinum toxin injections into the lateral pterygoid muscle. Most studies reported reductions in pain and improvements in jaw function. Compared with conventional approaches, several included studies reported more accurate needle placement, fewer insertion attempts, less need for needle repositioning, and shorter procedure times when ultrasound guidance was used. However, these procedural advantages did not consistently translate into superior long-term clinical outcomes. Conclusions: Overall, ultrasound-guided minimally invasive TMJ interventions appear feasible and generally safe, with their main benefit being improved visualization and procedural precision. Further standardized, high-quality studies are needed to clarify their clinical impact.

Background/Objectives: Orofacial myofascial pain (MFP) is one of the leading causes of chronic orofacial pain, often resulting in functional limitations and a compromised quality of life. Intramuscular injection therapies appear to be a promising alternative for patients resistant to conservative treatment. The objective of this rapid review was to synthesize evidence from randomized controlled trials evaluating intramuscular injectable therapies for orofacial myofascial pain. Specifically, the review aimed to compare the clinical effects of different injectable agents on pain intensity, mandibular function, and patient-reported outcomes, and to identify methodological limitations and research gaps within the current evidence base. Methods: A comprehensive search across five databases (ACM, BASE, Cochrane, PubMed, and Scopus) was conducted on March 15, 2026. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published between 2022 and 2026 that investigated the use of active injectable agents into the masticatory muscles for clinically diagnosed myofascial pain syndrome were included. Data regarding post-interventional pain intensity, masticatory function, mandibular range of motion, and safety were extracted to compare therapeutic efficacy across interventions. Results: A total of five RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Eligible studies evaluated intramuscular injections of botulinum toxin A, platelet-rich plasma (PRP), magnesium sulfate, and lidocaine, with sample sizes ranging from 30 to 180 participants. Across all interventions, consistent reductions in pain intensity and enhancements in masticatory function were observed. Furthermore, no major adverse events were reported. Conclusions: Intramuscular injectable therapies represent an emerging approach for reducing orofacial myofascial pain, particularly as a treatment for patients with persistent symptoms.

Background/Objectives: Recurrent temporomandibular joint dislocation is associated with repeated dislocation episodes, pain, impaired jaw function, and psychosocial burden. Injectable intra- and periarticular therapies have been proposed as minimally invasive methods of improving joint stability, but the available evidence is heterogeneous and frequently involves adjunctive procedures. This mapping review aimed to characterize injectable treatments whose effects could be assessed independently from simultaneous non-injectable interventions. Methods: PubMed (MEDLINE), Europe PMC, and BASE were searched from inception to 7 April 2026. Reference lists of included studies and relevant reviews were also screened. Studies reporting clinical outcomes of injectable intra- or periarticular treatments for recurrent mandibular dislocation were eligible when the effect of the injectable component could be evaluated independently. Study selection, data charting, and critical appraisal were performed using predefined methods. Results: Five primary clinical studies and eight secondary mapping or reference-checking sources were included. The primary studies evaluated autologous blood injection, dextrose prolotherapy, and sodium morrhuate or other sclerosing-agent injections. Most studies reported reductions in recurrent dislocation or subluxation and improvements in joint stability. Some also reported improvements in maximal mouth opening, clicking, pain, or other clinical outcomes. However, the evidence was limited by small sample sizes, heterogeneous protocols, variable injection sites, and limited comparative data. Conclusions: The available literature on injectable therapies for recurrent mandibular dislocation is limited and heterogeneous. Although included studies generally reported favorable outcomes, the evidence does not permit conclusions regarding the comparative effectiveness or superiority of any specific injectable modality.

Background/Objectives: This scoping review mapped how hyaluronic acid (HA) molecular weight has been defined and investigated in direct clinical comparisons for temporomandibular disorders (TMDs), including formulations, populations, procedures, outcomes, and methodological limitations. Methods: Final searches and selection were completed on 9 September 2026 using PubMed, BASE, CENTRAL, and Europe PMC. Prospective human studies comparing different intra-articular HA preparations under the same procedural protocol were eligible, including matched comparisons within multi-arm studies. Two reviewers independently screened and charted the evidence. Findings were synthesized descriptively without meta-analysis or formal risk-of-bias assessment. The protocol was registered in OSF (osf.io/sc8wv). Results: Five reports were included: three quasi-randomized trials and two prospective studies with sequential or unreported allocation between HA formulations. Four reported efficacy comparisons; one contributed safety data only after swelling and marked pain in 2 of 5 recipients prompted discontinuation of a high-molecular-weight arm. Molecular-weight categories overlapped across reports, formulation characteristics were incompletely reported, and protocols varied from one to five injections with differing use of arthrocentesis. Comparative follow-up ranged from 3 to 12 months. No eligible efficacy comparison detected a statistically significant difference, but small samples, allocation limitations, and incomplete subgroup reporting restricted interpretation. Conclusions: The evidence map identifies inconsistent formulation classification, procedural heterogeneity, and deficiencies in outcome and safety reporting as barriers to interpretation. It does not establish equivalence, superiority, or comparative safety of molecular-weight categories and provides specific priorities for future studies.

Immune-mediated temporomandibular joint disorders involve cytokine-driven inflammation and may represent a target for biologic therapy. This paper summarizes the evidence on intra-articular monoclonal antibody administration in temporomandibular joint disorders. PubMed, Europe PMC, and BASE were searched from inception to 7 April 2026 for clinical and preclinical studies evaluating intra-articular monoclonal antibodies in the temporomandibular joint. Four studies were identified: two retrospective clinical studies, one case report, and one preclinical study. All four studies investigated local TNF-α blockade: the three clinical studies used infliximab, whereas the preclinical study used an anti-rabbit TNF-α monoclonal antibody. Symptomatic benefit was confined to one adult case and anti-inflammatory effects to the preclinical study, whereas pediatric MRI abnormalities persisted or worsened, providing no evidence of structural efficacy. The evidence remains limited, heterogeneous, and exploratory. Intra-articular monoclonal antibody therapy is biologically plausible, but its clinical efficacy and safety require further investigation.