-
Arquivos Brasileiros de Cirurgia... 2024Advanced megaesophagus predisposes to risks of malnutrition infections and cancer, in addition to having a significant impact on quality of life. There is currently no... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Advanced megaesophagus predisposes to risks of malnutrition infections and cancer, in addition to having a significant impact on quality of life. There is currently no consensus in the literature regarding the best surgical option for advanced megaesophagus, although there is a predilection for esophagectomy, despite this surgery being associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Other surgical procedures, such as esophageal mucosectomy and Heller cardiomyotomy, have been proposed with good results.
AIMS
To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature on the surgical treatment of advanced megaesophagus.
METHODS
Databases used included PubMed, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (Lilacs), Embase and Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MedLine), as well as reference research. Two reviewers selected the articles independently.
RESULTS
A total of 14 articles were chosen, which included 1,862 patients. The studies were divided into two groups: laparoscopic cardiomyotomy with fundoplication (213 patients) and major surgeries (1,649 patients). The studies yielded mostly good or excellent results regarding late outcomes in both groups. However, there was significant morbidity associated with the major surgeries group.
CONCLUSIONS
Laparoscopic Heller myotomy can be performed on patients with advanced megaesophagus, with lower rates of complications and mortality compared to major surgeries, with reservations regarding late outcomes results.
Topics: Humans; Esophageal Achalasia; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38958345
DOI: 10.1590/0102-6720202400016e1809 -
American Journal of Physical Medicine &... Jul 2024To evaluate the effectiveness of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) programs and other rehabilitation interventions in adults with asthma.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the effectiveness of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) programs and other rehabilitation interventions in adults with asthma.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
RESULTS
MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health Literature and CENTRAL were searched from inception to 31 May 2023. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42022331440. Thirty-six randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were analysed, and only 26 were pooled in the meta-analysis due to the heterogeneity of comparisons and outcomes across the studies. Pulmonary rehabilitation, compared with education associated with breathing exercises, may result in little to no difference in the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) (mean difference 0.01 score, 95% confidence interval -0.48 to 0.50, 163 participants, three studies, low certainty).
CONCLUSION
Our findings show that pulmonary rehabilitation, compared with education associated with breathing exercises, may result in little to no difference in the impact of asthma on health-related quality of life. Overall, the certainty of evidence was low or very low preventing any firm conclusion on the effects of single or combined rehabilitation interventions.
PubMed: 38958276
DOI: 10.1097/PHM.0000000000002552 -
Child: Care, Health and Development Jul 2024Participation in life activities is an integral part of health and a main outcome of rehabilitation services for children and adolescents with disabilities. However,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Participation in life activities is an integral part of health and a main outcome of rehabilitation services for children and adolescents with disabilities. However, there is still no consensus on the most effective way to improve participation. The aim of this systematic review is to determine the effectiveness of therapeutic interventions on participation outcomes of children with cerebral palsy (CP).
METHODS
A systematic review was conducted, searching the databases PubMed, Cochrane Library, Science Direct, Web of Science and Scopus for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), between 2001 and 2023. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they evaluated children with CP undergoing any intervention and using any tool measuring participation as an outcome measure. A meta-analysis of treatment effect was conducted. A sensitivity analysis was conducted to identify the effect on participation when intervention targeted different International Classification of Functioning (ICF) domains.
RESULTS
A total of 1572 records were identified. Eight RCTs including 384 children (195 in the intervention group and 189 in the control group) were included in the systematic review and in the meta-analysis. A sensitivity analysis showed that interventions focusing on participation significantly improved participation; standardized mean difference (1.83; 95% CI: 1.33-2.32; Z = 7.21; P < 0.00001). When other types of interventions, that is, focusing on body functions and structures or activities, were used, then participation was not favourably affected.
INTERPRETATION
Interventions primarily targeting barriers to participation across several ICF domains have a greater influence on enhancing participation. Interventions aimed at enhancing specific motor skills, including gross and fine motor function or strength, do not necessarily have a positive impact on participation.
Topics: Humans; Cerebral Palsy; Child; Adolescent; Social Participation; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Activities of Daily Living
PubMed: 38958263
DOI: 10.1111/cch.13301 -
Clinical Cardiology Jul 2024Malignant ventricular arrhythmia (VA) and sudden cardiac death (SCD) have been reported in patients with mitral valve prolapse (MVP); however, effective risk... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The Association Between Late Gadolinium Enhancement by Cardiac Magnetic Resonance and Ventricular Arrhythmia in Patients With Mitral Valve Prolapse: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
INTRODUCTION
Malignant ventricular arrhythmia (VA) and sudden cardiac death (SCD) have been reported in patients with mitral valve prolapse (MVP); however, effective risk stratification methods are still lacking. Myocardial fibrosis is thought to play an important role in the development of VA; however, observational studies have produced contradictory findings regarding the relationship between VA and late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) in MVP patients. The aim of this meta-analysis and systematic review of observational studies was to investigate the association between left ventricular LGE and VA in patients with MVP.
METHODS
We searched the PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases from 1993 to 2023 to identify case-control, cross-sectional, and cohort studies that compared the incidence of VA in patients with MVP who had left ventricular LGE and those without left ventricular LGE.
RESULTS
A total of 1464 subjects with MVP from 12 observational studies met the eligibility criteria. Among them, VA episodes were reported in 221 individuals (15.1%). Meta-analysis demonstrated that the presence of left ventricular LGE was significantly associated with an increased risk of VA (pooled risk ratio 2.96, 95% CI: 2.26-3.88, p for heterogeneity = 0.07, I = 40%). However, a meta-regression analysis of the prevalence of mitral regurgitation (MR) showed that the severity of MR did not significantly affect the association between the occurrence of LGE and VA (p = 0.079).
CONCLUSION
The detection of LGE could be helpful for stratifying the risk of VA in patients with MVP.
Topics: Humans; Mitral Valve Prolapse; Gadolinium; Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Cine; Contrast Media; Arrhythmias, Cardiac; Risk Factors; Risk Assessment
PubMed: 38958255
DOI: 10.1002/clc.24316 -
Child: Care, Health and Development Jul 2024Early executive functioning (EF) skills are foundational capabilities that predict school readiness, academic development and psychiatric risk. Early interventions...
BACKGROUND
Early executive functioning (EF) skills are foundational capabilities that predict school readiness, academic development and psychiatric risk. Early interventions enhancing these capabilities could have critical import in improving outcomes. However, to develop interventions, it is necessary to identify specific EF skills that will vary with child age. Thus, we aimed to examine the characteristics and efficacy of interventions targeting EF in infancy and early childhood up to age 3.
METHODS
A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, CINAHL and APA PsycINFO databases was performed for studies published before December 2022. Randomized and non-randomized studies of interventions designed to improve at least one EF skill in children ≤3 years were included. EF skills included attentional control, inhibition/self-regulation, activity initiation, working memory, cognitive flexibility, planning ability, problem-solving and performance monitoring. We independently extracted data, used the revised Cochrane Risk-of-Bias tool to assess the quality of the evidence and conducted Synthesis Without Meta-analysis (SWiM). The overall quality of the evidence and the strength of recommendations was determined using elements of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.
RESULTS
Thirty-five studies met inclusion criteria (original n = 7467). Studies were highly variable in the EF skill targeted, target subject (i.e., child, parent and teacher), nature and dosage of the intervention, and timing of outcome assessment. Most interventions focused on improving impulse control and self-regulation. The overall quality of evidence was low to moderate with a high risk of bias, though six studies had low risk of bias but yielded mixed findings of efficacy.
CONCLUSIONS
The relatively small number of early EF intervention studies uses such variable methods that there is currently no converging evidence of efficacy to recommend a specific intervention. Thus, findings support the need for a more systematic, targeted approach to the design and implementation of early EF interventions for target populations.
Topics: Humans; Executive Function; Child, Preschool; Infant; Child Development; Early Intervention, Educational
PubMed: 38958229
DOI: 10.1111/cch.13298 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2024Schizophrenia is often a severe and disabling psychiatric disorder. Antipsychotics remain the mainstay of psychotropic treatment for people with psychosis. In limited... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Schizophrenia is often a severe and disabling psychiatric disorder. Antipsychotics remain the mainstay of psychotropic treatment for people with psychosis. In limited resource and humanitarian contexts, it is key to have several options for beneficial, low-cost antipsychotics, which require minimal monitoring. We wanted to compare oral haloperidol, as one of the most available antipsychotics in these settings, with a second-generation antipsychotic, olanzapine.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the clinical benefits and harms of haloperidol compared to olanzapine for people with schizophrenia and schizophrenia-spectrum disorders.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia study-based register of trials, which is based on monthly searches of CENTRAL, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, Embase, ISRCTN, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed and WHO ICTRP. We screened the references of all included studies. We contacted relevant authors of trials for additional information where clarification was required or where data were incomplete. The register was last searched on 14 January 2023.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised clinical trials comparing haloperidol with olanzapine for people with schizophrenia and schizophrenia-spectrum disorders. Our main outcomes of interest were clinically important change in global state, relapse, clinically important change in mental state, extrapyramidal side effects, weight increase, clinically important change in quality of life and leaving the study early due to adverse effects.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We independently evaluated and extracted data. For dichotomous outcomes, we calculated risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) and the number needed to treat for an additional beneficial or harmful outcome (NNTB or NNTH) with 95% CI. For continuous data, we estimated mean differences (MD) or standardised mean differences (SMD) with 95% CIs. For all included studies, we assessed risk of bias (RoB 1) and we used the GRADE approach to create a summary of findings table.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 68 studies randomising 9132 participants. We are very uncertain whether there is a difference between haloperidol and olanzapine in clinically important change in global state (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.02; 6 studies, 3078 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain whether there is a difference between haloperidol and olanzapine in relapse (RR 1.42, 95% CI 1.00 to 2.02; 7 studies, 1499 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Haloperidol may reduce the incidence of clinically important change in overall mental state compared to olanzapine (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.81; 13 studies, 1210 participants; low-certainty evidence). For every eight people treated with haloperidol instead of olanzapine, one fewer person would experience this improvement. The evidence suggests that haloperidol may result in a large increase in extrapyramidal side effects compared to olanzapine (RR 3.38, 95% CI 2.28 to 5.02; 14 studies, 3290 participants; low-certainty evidence). For every three people treated with haloperidol instead of olanzapine, one additional person would experience extrapyramidal side effects. For weight gain, the evidence suggests that there may be a large reduction in the risk with haloperidol compared to olanzapine (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.61; 18 studies, 4302 participants; low-certainty evidence). For every 10 people treated with haloperidol instead of olanzapine, one fewer person would experience weight increase. A single study suggests that haloperidol may reduce the incidence of clinically important change in quality of life compared to olanzapine (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.91; 828 participants; low-certainty evidence). For every nine people treated with haloperidol instead of olanzapine, one fewer person would experience clinically important improvement in quality of life. Haloperidol may result in an increase in the incidence of leaving the study early due to adverse effects compared to olanzapine (RR 1.99, 95% CI 1.60 to 2.47; 21 studies, 5047 participants; low-certainty evidence). For every 22 people treated with haloperidol instead of olanzapine, one fewer person would experience this outcome. Thirty otherwise relevant studies and several endpoints from 14 included studies could not be evaluated due to inconsistencies and poor transparency of several parameters. Furthermore, even within studies that were included, it was often not possible to use data for the same reasons. Risk of bias differed substantially for different outcomes and the certainty of the evidence ranged from very low to low. The most common risks of bias leading to downgrading of the evidence were blinding (performance bias) and selective reporting (reporting bias).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Overall, the certainty of the evidence was low to very low for the main outcomes in this review, making it difficult to draw reliable conclusions. We are very uncertain whether there is a difference between haloperidol and olanzapine in terms of clinically important global state and relapse. Olanzapine may result in a slightly greater overall clinically important change in mental state and in a clinically important change in quality of life. Different side effect profiles were noted: haloperidol may result in a large increase in extrapyramidal side effects and olanzapine in a large increase in weight gain. The drug of choice needs to take into account side effect profiles and the preferences of the individual. These findings and the recent inclusion of olanzapine alongside haloperidol in the WHO Model List of Essential Medicines should increase the likelihood of it becoming more easily available in low- and middle- income countries, thereby improving choice and providing a greater ability to respond to side effects for people with lived experience of schizophrenia. There is a need for additional research using appropriate and equivalent dosages of these drugs. Some of this research needs to be done in low- and middle-income settings and should actively seek to account for factors relevant to these. Research on antipsychotics needs to be person-centred and prioritise factors that are of interest to people with lived experience of schizophrenia.
Topics: Humans; Olanzapine; Schizophrenia; Haloperidol; Antipsychotic Agents; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Administration, Oral; Quality of Life; Bias; Recurrence; Weight Gain; Adult
PubMed: 38958149
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013425.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2024Postoperative myocardial infarction (POMI) is associated with major surgeries and remains the leading cause of mortality and morbidity in people undergoing vascular... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Postoperative myocardial infarction (POMI) is associated with major surgeries and remains the leading cause of mortality and morbidity in people undergoing vascular surgery, with an incidence rate ranging from 5% to 20%. Preoperative coronary interventions, such as coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI), may help prevent acute myocardial infarction in the perioperative period of major vascular surgery when used in addition to routine perioperative drugs (e.g. statins, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, and antiplatelet agents), CABG by creating new blood circulation routes that bypass the blockages in the coronary vessels, and PCI by opening up blocked blood vessels. There is currently uncertainty around the benefits and harms of preoperative coronary interventions.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of preoperative coronary interventions for preventing acute myocardial infarction in the perioperative period of major open vascular or endovascular surgery.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid, LILACS, and CINAHL EBSCO on 13 March 2023. We also searched the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs that compared the use of preoperative coronary interventions plus usual care versus usual care for preventing acute myocardial infarction during major open vascular or endovascular surgery. We included participants of any sex or any age undergoing major open vascular surgery, major endovascular surgery, or hybrid vascular surgery.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes of interest were acute myocardial infarction, all-cause mortality, and adverse events resulting from preoperative coronary interventions. Our secondary outcomes were cardiovascular mortality, quality of life, vessel or graft secondary patency, and length of hospital stay. We reported perioperative and long-term outcomes (more than 30 days after intervention). We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
We included three RCTs (1144 participants). Participants were randomised to receive either preoperative coronary revascularisation with PCI or CABG plus usual care or only usual care before major vascular surgery. One trial enrolled participants if they had no apparent evidence of coronary artery disease. Another trial selected participants classified as high risk for coronary disease through preoperative clinical and laboratorial testing. We excluded one trial from the meta-analysis because participants from both the control and the intervention groups were eligible to undergo preoperative coronary revascularisation. We identified a high risk of performance bias in all included trials, with one trial displaying a high risk of other bias. However, the risk of bias was either low or unclear in other domains. We observed no difference between groups for perioperative acute myocardial infarction, but the evidence is very uncertain (risk ratio (RR) 0.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.02 to 4.57; 2 trials, 888 participants; very low-certainty evidence). One trial showed a reduction in incidence of long-term (> 30 days) acute myocardial infarction in participants allocated to the preoperative coronary interventions plus usual care group, but the evidence was very uncertain (RR 0.09, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.28; 1 trial, 426 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There was little to no effect on all-cause mortality in the perioperative period when comparing the preoperative coronary intervention plus usual care group to usual care alone, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.31 to 2.04; 2 trials, 888 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of preoperative coronary interventions on long-term (follow up: 2.7 to 6.2 years) all-cause mortality (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.80; 2 trials, 888 participants; very low-certainty evidence). One study reported no adverse effects related to coronary angiography, whereas the other two studies reported five deaths due to revascularisations. There may be no effect on cardiovascular mortality when comparing preoperative coronary revascularisation plus usual care to usual care in the short term (RR 0.07, 95% CI 0.00 to 1.32; 1 trial, 426 participants; low-certainty evidence). Preoperative coronary interventions plus usual care in the short term may reduce length of hospital stay slightly when compared to usual care alone (mean difference -1.17 days, 95% CI -2.05 to -0.28; 1 trial, 462 participants; low-certainty evidence). We downgraded the certainty of the evidence due to concerns about risk of bias, imprecision, and inconsistency. None of the included trials reported on quality of life or vessel graft patency at either time point, and no study reported on adverse effects, cardiovascular mortality, or length of hospital stay at long-term follow-up.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Preoperative coronary interventions plus usual care may have little or no effect on preventing perioperative acute myocardial infarction and reducing perioperative all-cause mortality compared to usual care, but the evidence is very uncertain. Similarly, limited, very low-certainty evidence shows that preoperative coronary interventions may have little or no effect on reducing long-term all-cause mortality. There is very low-certainty evidence that preoperative coronary interventions plus usual care may prevent long-term myocardial infarction, and low-certainty evidence that they may reduce length of hospital stay slightly, but not cardiovascular mortality in the short term, when compared to usual care alone. Adverse effects of preoperative coronary interventions were poorly reported in trials. Quality of life and vessel or graft patency were not reported. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence most frequently for high risk of bias, inconsistency, or imprecision. None of the analysed trials provided significant data on subgroups of patients who could potentially experience more substantial benefits from preoperative coronary intervention (e.g. altered ventricular ejection fraction). There is a need for evidence from larger and homogeneous RCTs to provide adequate statistical power to assess the role of preoperative coronary interventions for preventing acute myocardial infarction in the perioperative period of major open vascular or endovascular surgery.
Topics: Humans; Myocardial Infarction; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; Coronary Artery Bypass; Postoperative Complications; Endovascular Procedures; Vascular Surgical Procedures; Preoperative Care; Bias; Perioperative Period; Length of Stay
PubMed: 38958136
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD014920.pub2 -
Journal of Extracellular Vesicles Jul 2024Nowadays, it has become clear that extracellular vesicles (EVs) are not a cellular waste disposal vesicle but are an essential part of an intercellular communication... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Nowadays, it has become clear that extracellular vesicles (EVs) are not a cellular waste disposal vesicle but are an essential part of an intercellular communication system. Besides the use of EVs in biomarker studies and diagnostics, the potential of EV-therapeutics has been seen by many. They provide unique properties for disease therapy, including strong immune-modulatory actions, the possibility of engineering, low immunogenicity, and the capability of crossing biological barriers. Proof-of-concept of EV-therapeutics for various pathologies has been achieved in preclinical studies. However, clinical trials with EVs have only been emerging slowly. Here, we aim to provide a comprehensive overview of the current state-of-the-art concerning clinical studies using EVs in human therapy. By approaching the current knowledge in a systematic manner, we were able to include 21 reports for meta-analysis of safety and evaluation of efficacy outcomes. Overall, we have shown that EV-based therapy is safe with a low incidence of serious adverse events (SAE; 0.7% (95%-CI: 0.1-5.2%), and adverse events (AE; 4.4% (95%-CI: 0.7-22.2%). Subgroup analysis showed no significant difference in SAE when comparing autologous versus allogeneic administration, as well as engineered versus non-engineered EV products. A significantly higher number of AE was seen in autologous versus allogeneic administration. However, the clinical relevance remains questionable. Evaluation of the clinical outcomes of immunostimulatory, immunosuppressive or regenerative EV-therapies indicated improvement in the majority of treated patients. Despite these promising results, data need to be approached with caution due to a high heterogeneity in the EVs manufacturing methods, study design, and reporting of (S)AE. Overall, we conclude that EV-based therapy is safe and presents a promising opportunity in therapy. More efforts are needed in the standardization and harmonization of reporting of EV isolation and characterization data as well as in the reporting of (S)AE to allow inter-study comparison.
Topics: Humans; Extracellular Vesicles; Clinical Trials as Topic
PubMed: 38958077
DOI: 10.1002/jev2.12458 -
Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences Jul 2024Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a prevalent psychiatric condition and vortioxetine offers promising antidepressant effects due to its unique pharmacological profile....
AIM
Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a prevalent psychiatric condition and vortioxetine offers promising antidepressant effects due to its unique pharmacological profile. However, the dose-response relationships of vortioxetine for MDD is not well established. We aimed to conduct dose-response meta-analyses to fill this gap.
METHODS
We systematically searched multiple electronic databases for randomized controlled trials of vortioxetine for MDD, with the last search conducted on 08 February, 2024. The dose-response relationship was evaluated using a one-stage random-effects dose-response meta-analysis with restricted cubic spline model. The primary outcome was efficacy (mean change in depression scale score), with secondary outcomes including response, dropout for any reasons (acceptability), dropout for adverse events (tolerability), and any adverse events (safety).
RESULTS
The dose-response meta-analysis comprised 16 studies, with 4,294 participants allocated to the vortioxetine group and 2,299 participants allocated to the placebo group. The estimated 50% effective dose was 4.37 mg/day, and the near-maximal effective dose (95% effective dose) was 17.93 mg/day. Visual inspection of the dose-efficacy curve suggests that a plateau possibly had not been reached yet at 20 mg/day. Acceptability, tolerability and safety decreased as the dose increased. Subgroup analysis indicated that no significant differences were observed in acceptability, tolerability and safety among the dosage groups.
CONCLUSIONS
Vortioxetine may potentially provide additional therapeutic benefits when exceeding the current licensed dosage without significantly impacting safety. Conducting clinical trials exceeding the current approved dosage appears necessary to fully comprehend its efficacy and risk.
PubMed: 38957929
DOI: 10.1111/pcn.13709 -
Journal of the Indian Society of... Apr 2024Traditionally, pediatric endodontics lacked access to the full potential of rotary instruments. These instruments, designed for the permanent root canal system, often... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study
Comparative evaluation of the efficacy of the Pro AF Baby Gold and Kedo-S pediatric endodontic files for canal instrumentation, transportation, and centering ratio - A systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Traditionally, pediatric endodontics lacked access to the full potential of rotary instruments. These instruments, designed for the permanent root canal system, often presented limitations when used in primary teeth. To address this, exclusive pediatric rotary files with regular improvements have been introduced, featuring superior cutting efficiency with a focus on precise alignment. This design offers the advantage of reduced risk of ledges, perforations, instrument separation, and canal transportation. This study aimed to compare and evaluate the effectiveness of Pro AF Baby Gold and Kedo-S rotary files in preparing primary tooth root canals during pulpectomy procedures through a meta-analysis.
METHODOLOGY
The review was performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 guidelines. The review searched electronic databases from 2000 to February 2024 for studies evaluating the efficacy of Pro AF Baby Gold and Kedo-S files in terms of canal instrumentation, transportation, and centering ratio. The Cochrane risk of bias (ROB)-2 tool assessed quality, with analyses conducted using RevMan software version 5.3. The standardized mean difference (SMD) served as the summary with a random effects model (P < 0.05).
RESULTS
Out of the five studies identified through the eligibility criteria, three were deemed suitable for a meta-analysis, while all five were included in a qualitative synthesis. The quality assessment revealed a presence of moderate-to-low ROB. The pooled analysis using SMD did not show any statistically significant differences between the files, except for the centering ratio in the mesiobuccal canal, where the Kedo-S file performed slightly better. In addition, the absence of any significant asymmetry in the funnel plot suggests that there is likely no publication bias present in the data.
CONCLUSION
Pro AF Baby Gold files can be used as an alternative adjunct in pediatric endodontics to Kedo-S files and manual files.Prospero Registration: CRD42023469406.
Topics: Humans; Root Canal Preparation; Equipment Design; Tooth, Deciduous; Child; Dental Instruments; Pulpectomy
PubMed: 38957903
DOI: 10.4103/jisppd.jisppd_526_23