Logo do repositório
 

Postoperative pain in root canal treatment with ultrasonic versus conventional irrigation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

dc.contributor.authorChalub, Lucas Orbolato [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorNunes, Gabriel Pereira [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorFerrisse, Túlio Morandin [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorStrazzi-Sahyon, Henrico Badaoui [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorDos Santos, Paulo Henrique [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorGomes-Filho, João Eduardo [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorCintra, Luciano Tavares Angelo [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorSivieri-Araujo, Gustavo [UNESP]
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
dc.date.accessioned2022-04-29T08:39:17Z
dc.date.available2022-04-29T08:39:17Z
dc.date.issued2022-01-01
dc.description.abstractObjective: The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis (SRM) was to answer the question whether the use of ultrasonic irrigation (UI) results in less postoperative pain (PP) compared to conventional irrigation (CI). Methods: A literature search was performed within the main scientific databases carried out until May 2021. The eligibility criteria were randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Meta-analysis was conducted using R software with the “META” package, the mean difference (MD) measure of effect was calculated, and the fixed effect model was applied with a 95% confidence interval (CI). The Cochrane collaboration scale was used to assess risk of bias and the GRADE tool to assess the quality of evidence. Results: Six RCTs were included for systematic review and four for meta-analysis. UI resulted in less PP in 3 of 5 periods, at 6 h (MD − 1.40 [CI − 2.38 to − 0.42] p = 0.0052), 24 h (MD − 0.73 [CI − 1.07 to − 0.39] p = 0.0001), and 48 h (MD − 0.36 [CI − 0.59 to − 0.13] p = 0.022). However, PP showed no significant differences between the groups at 72 h and 7 days (p > 0.05). A low risk of bias was observed for most domains, except allocation that was considered unclear. The certainty of evidence was classified as moderate (24 h, 48 h, and 7 days) and low (6 and 72 h). Conclusion: Within the limitations of this SRM, UI presented less occurrence of PP than CI. Further randomized clinical trials are needed to corroborate these findings. Clinical relevance. UI should be used by clinicians as it reduces postoperative pain in patients undergoing endodontic treatment.en
dc.description.affiliationDepartment of Preventive and Restorative Dentistry Araçatuba School of Dentistry São Paulo State University - UNESP, 1193 José Bonifácio Street, SP
dc.description.affiliationOral Medicine Department of Diagnosis and Surgery Araraquara School of Dentistry São Paulo State University - UNESP, 1680 Humaitá Street, SP
dc.description.affiliationDepartment of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics Araçatuba School of Dentistry São Paulo State University - UNESP, 1193 José Bonifácio Street, SP
dc.description.affiliationUnespDepartment of Preventive and Restorative Dentistry Araçatuba School of Dentistry São Paulo State University - UNESP, 1193 José Bonifácio Street, SP
dc.description.affiliationUnespOral Medicine Department of Diagnosis and Surgery Araraquara School of Dentistry São Paulo State University - UNESP, 1680 Humaitá Street, SP
dc.description.affiliationUnespDepartment of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics Araçatuba School of Dentistry São Paulo State University - UNESP, 1193 José Bonifácio Street, SP
dc.identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-022-04386-0
dc.identifier.citationClinical Oral Investigations.
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s00784-022-04386-0
dc.identifier.issn1436-3771
dc.identifier.issn1432-6981
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85123822022
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/230313
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofClinical Oral Investigations
dc.sourceScopus
dc.subjectConventional irrigation
dc.subjectEndodontic treatment
dc.subjectMeta-analysis
dc.subjectPostoperative pain
dc.subjectSystematic review
dc.subjectUltrasonic irrigation
dc.titlePostoperative pain in root canal treatment with ultrasonic versus conventional irrigation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trialsen
dc.typeResenhapt
dspace.entity.typePublication
relation.isDepartmentOfPublication5f53b343-da2a-4737-96ec-6e2389a6d704
relation.isDepartmentOfPublication.latestForDiscovery5f53b343-da2a-4737-96ec-6e2389a6d704
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication8b3335a4-1163-438a-a0e2-921a46e0380d
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublicationca4c0298-cd82-48ee-a9c8-c97704bac2b0
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication.latestForDiscovery8b3335a4-1163-438a-a0e2-921a46e0380d
unesp.author.orcid0000-0001-8094-1422[1]
unesp.campusUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), Faculdade de Odontologia, Araçatubapt
unesp.campusUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), Faculdade de Odontologia, Araraquarapt
unesp.departmentMateriais odontológicos e Prótese - FOApt
unesp.departmentOdontologia Restauradora - FOApt
unesp.departmentDiagnóstico e Cirurgia - FOARpt

Arquivos