TMJ DisorderNCT07239037
MJ Arthrocentesis Using the Dental Implant Motor Irrigation Pump and the Conventional Technique in Treatment of Internal Derangement
A study testing Motor irrigation with 80% power, Motor irrigation with 40% power and conventional TMJ arthrocentesis in people with TMJ Disorder, run by Alexandria University at 1 site in Egypt.
Trial summary
Background: Millions of individuals worldwide suffer from temporomandibular joint (TMJ) disorders and are characterized by pain and joint dysfunction. TMJ internal derangement (ID) is the most frequent type of temporomandibular disorders (TMDs). Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 16 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- TMJ Disorder
- What is being tested?
- Motor irrigation with 80% power, Motor irrigation with 40% power and conventional TMJ arthrocentesis
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 30 participants
- Where
- 1 siteEgypt
- Study dates
- 1 Oct 2024to 15 Jul 2025
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 16 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- TMJ internal derangement with reduction.
- Both genders.
Who cannot join
- Patients with overlying infection or cellulitis
- Relevant systemic disease
- Previous TMJ surgery.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Egypt1 site
Outpatient Clinic of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Egypt
Alexandria, Azarita, 00203
About this study
Official title: Comparison Between TMJ Arthrocentesis Using the Dental Implant Motor Irrigation Pump and the Conventional Technique in Treatment of Internal Derangement
Background: Millions of individuals worldwide suffer from temporomandibular joint (TMJ) disorders and are characterized by pain and joint dysfunction. TMJ internal derangement (ID) is the most frequent type of temporomandibular disorders (TMDs). TMJ arthrocentesis represents a form of minimally invasive surgical treatment in patients suffering from internal derangement of the TMJ Aim of the study: To clinically compare between the effect of TMJ arthrocentesis under high hydraulic pressure by dental implant motor and the conventional method in treatment of TMJ internal derangement regarding pain and mandibular movements.
- Conditions
- TMJ Disorder
- Being tested
- Motor irrigation with 80% power, Motor irrigation with 40% power, conventional TMJ arthrocentesis
- Medical subject headings
- Temporomandibular Joint Disorders
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Motor irrigation with 80% powerOther
ten patients with TMJ internal derangement with reduction using dental implant motor irrigation pump in power 80%
Motor irrigation with 40% powerOther
ten patients with TMJ internal derangement with reduction using dental implant motor irrigation pump in power 40%
conventional TMJ arthrocentesisOther
ten patients with TMJ internal derangement using conventional technique
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| implant motor irrigation I | Experimental | Not described Receives: Other: Motor irrigation with 80% power |
| implant motor irrigation II | Experimental | Not described Receives: Other: Motor irrigation with 40% power |
| Conventional arthrocentesis | Active comparator | Not described Receives: Other: conventional TMJ arthrocentesis |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change in pain scores
a 10 point visual analogue scale (VAS)*. (0-1=none, 2-4=mild, 5-7=moderate, 8-10=severe) .
Measured: 1 week, 4 weeks, 3 months
Change in mouth opening
The patient's maximum mouth opening (MMO) value will be measured by taking the average of three consecutive measurements of the distance between the maxilla and mandible mid-central incisive teeth with the Endo ruler after the patients were asked to open
Measured: baseline, 1 week, 4 weeks, 3 months
Secondary outcomes (2)
post operative edema
Scales:
- None (no swelling)
- Mild (intra oral swelling confined to surgical field)
- Moderate (extra oral swelling in the surgical zone)
- Severe (extra oral swelling spreading beyond the surgical zone)
Measured: 1 week
change in mandibular movements
Patient's TMJ Lateral, protrusive and side to side movements will be measured
Measured: baseline, 1 week, 3 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted20 Nov 2025
- Study start1 Oct 2024
- Primary completion15 Jul 2025
- Study completion15 Jul 2025
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for TMJ DisorderStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Alexandria UniversityThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 30 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Alexandria University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07239037
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 0911-05/2024
- Status last verified
- Oct 2025
- First submitted
- 16 Nov 2025
- Last updated
- 20 Nov 2025
- Results posted
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Publications
Mohamed AS, Shaaban R, El Halawani GN, Sakr AA. Comparative efficacy of dental implant motor-assisted versus conventional temporomandibular joint arthrocentesis for disc displacement with reduction (a randomized controlled clinical trial). BMC Oral Health. 2026 Apr 25;26(1):864. doi: 10.1186/s12903-026-08334-2.
PubMed 42035057
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 20 Nov 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Comparison Between TMJ Arthrocentesis Using the Dental Implant Motor Irrigation Pump and the Conventional Technique in Treatment of Internal Derangement
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07239037
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 0911-05/2024
- Conditions
- TMJ Disorder
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 30 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Alexandria UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Oct 2024 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 15 Jul 2025 (actual)
- Study completion
- 15 Jul 2025 (actual)
- First posted
- 20 Nov 2025 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Background: Millions of individuals worldwide suffer from temporomandibular joint (TMJ) disorders and are characterized by pain and joint dysfunction. TMJ internal derangement (ID) is the most frequent type of temporomandibular disorders (TMDs). TMJ arthrocentesis represents a form of minimally invasive surgical treatment in patients suffering from internal derangement of the TMJ Aim of the study: To clinically compare between the effect of TMJ arthrocentesis under high hydraulic pressure by dental implant motor and the conventional method in treatment of TMJ internal derangement regarding pain and mandibular movements.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 3
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| implant motor irrigation I | Experimental | Other: Motor irrigation with 80% power |
| implant motor irrigation II | Experimental | Other: Motor irrigation with 40% power |
| Conventional arthrocentesis | Active comparator | Other: conventional TMJ arthrocentesis |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 16 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- TMJ internal derangement with reduction.
- Both genders.
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Patients with overlying infection or cellulitis
- Relevant systemic disease
- Previous TMJ surgery.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Motor irrigation with 80% powerten patients with TMJ internal derangement with reduction using dental implant motor irrigation pump in power 80% | Other | implant motor irrigation I |
| Motor irrigation with 40% powerten patients with TMJ internal derangement with reduction using dental implant motor irrigation pump in power 40% | Other | implant motor irrigation II |
| conventional TMJ arthrocentesisten patients with TMJ internal derangement using conventional technique | Other | Conventional arthrocentesis |
Primary outcome
Change in pain scores
Time frame: 1 week, 4 weeks, 3 months
a 10 point visual analogue scale (VAS)*. (0-1=none, 2-4=mild, 5-7=moderate, 8-10=severe) .
Change in mouth opening
Time frame: baseline, 1 week, 4 weeks, 3 months
The patient's maximum mouth opening (MMO) value will be measured by taking the average of three consecutive measurements of the distance between the maxilla and mandible mid-central incisive teeth with the Endo ruler after the patients were asked to open
2 secondary outcomes
post operative edema
Time frame: 1 week
change in mandibular movements
Time frame: baseline, 1 week, 3 months
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 20 Nov 2025.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 42035057Mohamed AS, Shaaban R, El Halawani GN, Sakr AA. Comparative efficacy of dental implant motor-assisted versus conventional temporomandibular joint arthrocentesis for disc displacement with reduction (a randomized controlled clinical trial). BMC Oral Health. 2026 Apr 25;26(1):864. doi: 10.1186/s12903-026-08334-2.
Related trials for TMJ Disorder
Recruiting
Photobiomodulation for Management of Temporomandibular Disorder Pain
Pain Related to TMD
Recruiting
Effects of Vagus Nerve Stimulation on Temporomandibular Disorders.
TMD, Temporomandibular Disorders (TMDs)
Recruiting
Marine Lipids Ease Painful TMD
Temporomandibular Disorder (TMD)
Not yet recruiting
Comparing Dextrose Prolotherapy vs. Sodium Hyaluronic Acid Injections for Jaw Joint Internal Derangement
Temporomandibular Joint Internal Derangement, TMJ-ID
Recruiting
R01_Pilot Jaw Muscle Phenotypes
Chronic TMD Pain, Temporomandibular Disorder
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Motor irrigation with 80% power, Motor irrigation with 40% power and conventional TMJ arthrocentesis in people with TMJ Disorder, run by Alexandria University at 1 site in Egypt.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 3 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 20 Nov 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Egypt. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Change in pain scores (time frame: 1 week, 4 weeks, 3 months). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT07239037, which also lists 1 linked publication.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 20 Nov 2025.