Diagnostic correlation between clinical protocols and magnetic resonance findings in temporomandibular disorders: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Abstract Background Our aim was to assess the diagnostic correlation between clinical protocols and magnetic resonance (MRI) findings in temporomandibular disorders (TMDs), including disc displacement with and without reduction (DDwR; DDwoR) and arthralgia. Methods A systematic review performed in two phases according to the PRISMA checklist. Specific indexing terms were used for search of studies assessing TMDs through clinical diagnostic protocols with the aid of Research Diagnostic Criteria for TMDs or Diagnostic Criteria for TMDs. Quality assessment performed using QUADAS‐2. Heterogeneity was assessed using I 2 . Publication bias was assessed using funnel plots. For meta‐analysis, we used random effect model or fixed effect. The main outcomes were sensitivity and specificity of clinical protocols. Results Fourteen studies included in the qualitative analysis and 11 studies in the meta‐analysis. None of the studies fulfilled all criteria of QUADAS‐2. High heterogeneity and high publication bias were found among the studies. Clinical protocols for assessing DDwR compared with MRI showed pooled sensitivity of 66% and specificity of 72%. For DDwoR, sensitivity was 61% and specificity 98%. For arthralgia, sensitivity was 43% and specificity 68% for the presence of effusion. Conclusions This review reveals the need for studies with improved quality. Clinical protocols show poor to moderate validity in diagnosis of DDwR and DDwoR compared with MRI. No correlation was found between a clinical diagnosis of arthralgia and MRI effusion. Clinical diagnostic protocols can be used as screening tools, reserving the use of MRI for a more accurate diagnosis in patients with symptoms or dysfunction.