-
Clinical Oral Investigations Apr 2021To describe the efficacy and number of side effects for the Gow-Gates mandibular block (GGMB) and Vazirani-Akinosi mandibular block (VAMB) compared to inferior alveolar... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
To describe the efficacy and number of side effects for the Gow-Gates mandibular block (GGMB) and Vazirani-Akinosi mandibular block (VAMB) compared to inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) in patients requiring lower third molar (L3M) extraction.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic search was performed in three electronic databases and complemented with a manual search. The inclusion criteria were randomised clinical trials in healthy patients who underwent at least one L3M extraction. Screening and article selection were carried out by two independent reviewers. After data extraction, a meta-analysis was performed for the success rate, number of positive aspirations, and onset time outcomes.
RESULTS
Six randomised clinical trials were included out of the 367 potentially eligible papers. No significant differences were found in terms of success rate using GGMB (risk ratio [RR] 1.04; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.92 to 1.18; P = 0.48) nor VAMB (RR 0.96; 95% CI 0.86 to 1.06; P = 0.41). The VAMB group exhibited a lower number of positive aspirations than the IANB group (RR 0.08; 95% CI 0.01 to 0.55; P = 0.01), but there was no statistically significant difference between the GGMB and IANB groups (RR 1.06; 95% CI 0.13 to 8.78; P = 0.96). The delayed onset was even longer in GGMB (mean difference [MD] 3.32 min; 95% CI 1.98 to 4.66; P < 0.001) and VAMB (MD 0.90 min; 95% CI 0.37 to 1.43; P = 0.0001) than IANB.
CONCLUSIONS
GGMB and VAMB seem to be effective and safe anaesthetic techniques for the removal of L3M, but these blocks exhibited a more delayed onset time than IANB.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE
GGMB and VAMB are safe and effective anaesthetic techniques for the removal of L3M. However, IANB can still be considered the first option since GGMB and VAMB exhibited more delayed onset times and variable buccal nerve anaesthesia.
Topics: Anesthesia, Dental; Anesthetics, Local; Humans; Mandibular Nerve; Molar, Third; Nerve Block; Pulpitis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 32839834
DOI: 10.1007/s00784-020-03525-9 -
Evidence-based Dentistry Jun 2023A systematic appraisal and statistical aggregation of primary studies. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
DESIGN
A systematic appraisal and statistical aggregation of primary studies.
DATA SOURCES
Scopus/ELSEVIER, PubMed/MEDLINE, Clarivate Analytics' Web of Science (i.e., Web of Science Core Collection-WoS, Korean Journal Database-KJD, Russian Science Citation Index-RSCI, SciELO Citation Index-SCIELO), and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) via the Cochrane Library.The complementary searches consisted of OpenGrey, Google Scholar (first 100 returns), Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations, Open Access Theses and Dissertations, DART-Europe E-theses Portal-DEEP, Opening access to UK theses-EThOS.
STUDY SELECTION
Human clinical trials studies in English language with at least 10 patients with mature or immature permanent teeth with pulpitis characterized by spontaneous pain in each arm (i.e., root canal treatment [RCT] and pulpotomy) at the end of the study, comparing the patient- (Primary: survival, pain, tenderness, swelling assessed by clinical history, clinical examination, and pain scales; Secondary: tooth function, need for further intervention, adverse effects; OHRQoL using a validated questionnaire) and clinical-reported outcomes (Primary: emerging apical radiolucency as per intraoral periapical radiograph or limited FOV CBCT scan; Secondary: radiological evidence of continued root formation and presence of sinus tract).
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Two independent review authors conducted study selection, data extraction and risk of bias (RoB) assessment and a third reviewer was consulted for solving disagreements. When insufficient or absent information, the corresponding author was reached out to for further explanation. The Cochrane RoB tool for randomized trials (RoB 2.0) was evaluated the quality of studies.The meta-analysis was performed on a fixed-effect model to estimate pooled effect size such as odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were performed using the R software. The quality of evidence assessed by the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach (GRADEpro GDT: GRADEpro Guideline Development Tool [software], McMaster University, 2015).
RESULTS
Five primary studies were included. Four studies referred to a multicentre trial assessing postoperative pain and long-term success rate after pulpotomy compared with one-visit RCT in 407 mature molars. The other study was a multicentre trial assessing postoperative pain in 550 mature molars treated with pulpotomy and pulp capping with the calcium-enriched mixture (CEM), pulpotomy and pulp capping with mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) and one-visit RCT. Both trials primarily reported first molars from young adults. When looking at the results of postoperative pain, all the trials included had a low RoB. However, when evaluating the clinical and radiographic outcomes of the included reports, it was determined that there was a high RoB. The meta-analysis found that the likelihood of experiencing pain (i.e., mild, moderate, or severe) at the 7th postoperative day was not affected by the type of intervention (OR = 0.99, 95% CI 0.63-1.55, I = 0%).The study design, risk of bias, inconsistency, indirectness, imprecision, and publication bias domains were used to grade the quality of evidence for postoperative pain between RCT and full pulpotomy, resulting in a 'High' grade. In the first year, clinical success was high for both interventions, with a rate of 98%. However, the success rate declined over time, with pulpotomy showing a 78.1% success rate and RCT showing a 75.3% success rate at the 5-year follow up.
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review was limited by the inclusion of only two trials, indicating a lack of sufficient evidence to draw definitive conclusions. Nonetheless, the available clinical data suggests that patient-reported pain outcomes do not differ significantly between RCT and pulpotomy at Day 7 postoperatively, and that the long-term clinical success rate of both treatments is comparable, as demonstrated by a single randomized control trial. However, to establish a more robust evidence base, additional high-quality randomized clinical trials, conducted by diverse research groups, are needed in this field. In conclusion, this review underscores the insufficiency of current evidence to draw solid recommendations.
Topics: Young Adult; Humans; Pulpotomy; Evidence Gaps; Dental Pulp Cavity; Root Canal Therapy; Pain, Postoperative; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Multicenter Studies as Topic
PubMed: 37188923
DOI: 10.1038/s41432-023-00878-4 -
The Journal of Evidence-based Dental... Sep 2020Evidence-based clinical practice guideline on antibiotic use for the urgent management of pulpal- and periapical-related dental pain and intraoral swelling: A report... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
ARTICLE TITLE AND BIBLIOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
Evidence-based clinical practice guideline on antibiotic use for the urgent management of pulpal- and periapical-related dental pain and intraoral swelling: A report from the American Dental Association. Lockhart PB, Tampi MP, Abt E, et al. J Am Dent Assoc 2019;150(11):906-921.e12.
SOURCE OF FUNDING
The American Dental Association.
TYPE OF STUDY/DESIGN
Systematic review with meta-analysis of data.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Humans; Pain; Pulpitis; United States
PubMed: 32921385
DOI: 10.1016/j.jebdp.2020.101465 -
Clinical Oral Investigations Nov 2020Pain management for the extraction of the mandibular third molar is a challenge as compelling evidence in comparative anaesthetics is currently lacking. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
Pain management for the extraction of the mandibular third molar is a challenge as compelling evidence in comparative anaesthetics is currently lacking.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Thorough literature searches took place in PubMed, ScienceDirect, CENTRAL, Embase, Web of Science, CBM, and CNKI. Thirty-three trials were meta-analysed using a Bayesian statistical approach within the random-effects model. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation was performed to determine the overall quality of evidence across all comparisons.
RESULTS
In terms of success rate, an inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) injection of 2% lidocaine with epinephrine was less effective than a combined injection of buccal infiltration (BI) and lingual infiltration (LI) with a 4% articaine (RR = 0.85 [0.75, 0.96], P = 0.611). According to visual analogue scale (VAS), 2% lidocaine-IANB with epinephrine caused higher VAS scores than 4% articaine-IANB with epinephrine (MD = 0.84 [0.28, 1.40], P = 0.057), whereas 0.5% levobupivacaine-IANB showed lower scores than 2% lidocaine-IANB (MD = - 1.62 [- 2.97, - 0.28], P = 0.045). Also, 2% lidocaine-IANB with epinephrine presented longer latency than both 4% articaine-IANB with epinephrine (MD = 39.44 [16.97, 61.90], P < 0.001) and 4% articaine-BI + LI with epinephrine (MD = 164.41 [16.23, 312.58], P < 0.001); 4% articaine-IANB with epinephrine produced shorter latency than 0.5% bupivacaine-IANB with epinephrine (MD = - 42.92 [- 70.28, - 15.56], P = 0.106); 0.75% ropivacaine-IANB caused shorter onset of action compared with 2% lidocaine-IANB (MD = - 40.88 [- 65.50, - 16.26], P < 0.001). In addition, 2% lidocaine-IANB with epinephrine produced significantly shorter duration than both 4% articaine-IANB with epinephrine (MD = - 47.33 [- 57.88, - 36.77], P = 0.265) and 2% mepivacaine-IANB with epinephrine (MD = - 10.01 [- 19.59, - 0.44], P = 0.769). The duration of action triggered by 4% articaine-IANB with epinephrine was shorter compared with 0.5% bupivacaine-IANB with epinephrine (MD = - 64.17 [- 74.65, - 53.69], P = 0.926). Both 0.5% levobupivacaine-IANB and 0.75% ropivacaine-IANB produced longer duration of action than 2% lidocaine-IANB (MD = 333.70 [267.33, 400.07], P < 0.001) and (MD = 288.01 [287.67, 288.34], P = 0.634, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS
The network meta-analysis demonstrated that the intraosseous injection of 4% articaine with epinephrine had the most noteworthy success rate. However, the combination of BI and LI of 4% articaine with epinephrine, and IANB of 0.5% bupivacaine were, according to a VAS, the most effective. It should be noted that a rapid onset of action was produced by BI combined with LI of 4% articaine with epinephrine and IANB of 2% mepivacaine with epinephrine, while the most prolonged duration of action was generated by IANB of 0.5% levobupivacaine or 0.5% bupivacaine.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE
For a better understanding of local anaesthesia for the extraction of the third molar, our study was aimed to provide evidence to guide better dental practices in pain management for clinicians.
Topics: Anesthesia, Dental; Anesthesia, Local; Anesthetics, Local; Bayes Theorem; Carticaine; Double-Blind Method; Humans; Lidocaine; Mandibular Nerve; Molar, Third; Nerve Block; Network Meta-Analysis; Pulpitis
PubMed: 32833132
DOI: 10.1007/s00784-020-03490-3 -
Acta Odontologica Scandinavica Oct 2019Coronal pulpotomies were recently re-investigated as an alternative to root canal treatment in vital permanent teeth. General dentists may be interested in knowing how...
Coronal pulpotomies were recently re-investigated as an alternative to root canal treatment in vital permanent teeth. General dentists may be interested in knowing how to perform full pulpotomy, in particular in face of difficult endodontic cases of vital teeth. A systematic review was undertaken on the PubMed and Cochrane databases in order to determine which procedure should be applied for pulp capping and coronal restoration in routine dental practice. Fifty-three publications were included and allocated to one of two methodological categories: histological and clinical studies. There is no evidence to recommend one single procedure for full pulpotomy in vital permanent teeth that can be indicated for different pulpal diagnoses which differ greatly in terms of the inflammation process from healthy teeth to irreversible pulpitis. For each clinical case, all actions aiming to prevent pre-operative contamination, to control per-operative infection and to achieve a complete seal above the radicular pulp sections are unavoidable steps that should be complied with. Reproducing procedures adopted in high quality trials could insure high success rates.
Topics: Dental Pulp Capping; Dental Pulp Exposure; Dentition, Permanent; Humans; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Pulpitis; Pulpotomy; Silicates
PubMed: 31146622
DOI: 10.1080/00016357.2019.1614217 -
Medicina Oral, Patologia Oral Y Cirugia... Nov 2021It is unclear if buccal articaine infiltration can be used as an alternative to standard inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) for treating mandibular molars in pediatric... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Can buccal infiltration of articaine replace traditional inferior alveolar nerve block for the treatment of mandibular molars in pediatric patients?: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
It is unclear if buccal articaine infiltration can be used as an alternative to standard inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) for treating mandibular molars in pediatric patients. Therefore, this study aimed to pool evidence to compare the efficacy of buccal infiltration of articaine vs IANB with lignocaine for pediatric dental procedures.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
We searched the PubMed, Embase, ScienceDirect, CENTRAL, and Google Scholar databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the two techniques in pediatric patients and reporting the success of anesthesia and/or pain during treatment. PRISMA guidelines were followed.
RESULTS
Seven RCTs were included. Pooled analysis of five studies indicated no statistically significant difference in the success rates of the two anesthetic techniques (OR: 1.02; 95% CI: 0.13, 7.96; I2=69%, p=0.98). Meta-analysis of data from the four studies demonstrated no statistically significant difference in pain during the procedure with buccal infiltration of articaine or IANB with lignocaine (SMD: 0.62; 95% CI: -1.37, 0.12; I2=88%, p=0.10).
CONCLUSIONS
Evidence suggests that buccal infiltration of articaine is a viable alternative to IANB with lignocaine in pediatric patients for treating mandibular molars. Based on the confidence intervals, there may be a tendency of higher success rates with buccal infiltration of articaine.
Topics: Anesthesia, Dental; Anesthetics, Local; Carticaine; Child; Double-Blind Method; Humans; Lidocaine; Mandibular Nerve; Molar; Nerve Block; Pulpitis
PubMed: 34564678
DOI: 10.4317/medoral.24726 -
The Journal of Evidence-based Dental... Dec 2022Can 4% Articaine Buccal Infiltration Replace Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block (IANB) with 2% Xylocaine for Pulp Therapy in Primary Mandibular Molars? A Systematic Review....
ARTICLE TITLE AND BIBLIOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
Can 4% Articaine Buccal Infiltration Replace Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block (IANB) with 2% Xylocaine for Pulp Therapy in Primary Mandibular Molars? A Systematic Review. Sunny P Tirupathi, Srinitya Rajasekhar, Mayuri Ganesh, Abhishek Vamshi, David Tyro, Int J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2021;14(3):420-425.
SOURCE OF FUNDING
The authors did not state any funding support.
TYPE OF STUDY/DESIGN
Systematic review.
Topics: Humans; Carticaine; Lidocaine; Anesthetics, Local; Anesthesia, Dental; Mandibular Nerve; Nerve Block; Double-Blind Method; Pulpitis
PubMed: 36494115
DOI: 10.1016/j.jebdp.2022.101801 -
Brazilian Oral Research 2020There is a lack of evidence about the best approach for cavitated caries lesions with the possibility of pulpal involvement in primary teeth. Thus, the present authors...
There is a lack of evidence about the best approach for cavitated caries lesions with the possibility of pulpal involvement in primary teeth. Thus, the present authors aimed to verify the best treatment for deep caries lesions with or without pulp involvement in primary teeth. The search was conducted in MEDLINE/Pubmed and Web of Science databases until May 2020. Studies that compared techniques to manage deep caries lesions with at least 12 months of follow-up were included. The risk of bias was evaluated using the RoB tool. Network meta-analysis and pairwise meta-analyses were conducted considering the treatment clinical success as an outcome, according to the pulp health condition. From 491 potentially eligible studies, 9 were included. For deep caries lesions with pulp vitality, the Hall Technique presented the highest probability of success (78%). In the event of accidental pulp exposure, pulpectomy presented a 76% chance of providing the best clinical results. For pulp necrosis, no difference was observed between a pulpectomy and non-instrumented endodontic treatment (RR = 0.69; 95%CI: 0.21-2.33) Thus, it was concluded that the Hall Technique may be a better option for deep caries lesions with pulp vitality. In cases of accidental pulp exposure of vital teeth during caries removal, a pulpectomy may be considered the best option. However, there are insufficient studies to build up evidence about the best treatment option when irreversible pulpitis or pulp necrosis is present.
Topics: Dental Caries; Dental Pulp; Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Pulpectomy; Tooth, Deciduous
PubMed: 33206777
DOI: 10.1590/1807-3107bor-2021.vol35.0004