Efficacy and Safety of Oral Premedication on Pain after Nonsurgical Root Canal Treatment: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Effect of sublingual fast-dissolving piroxicam premedication on postoperative pain experience in mandibular molars with non-vital pulp: a randomized double-blind controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The aim of this trial was to evaluate the effect of a preoperative, single dose sublingual fast-dissolving piroxicam (20 mg) compared to placebo on postoperative pain at rest (POP), on biting (POPB) and on percussion (POPer) after single-visit endodontic treatment of asymptomatic mandibular molars with non-vital pulp.

METHODS

Seventy patients randomly received either piroxicam or placebo 1 h before treatment (n = 35). Patients recorded their pain (POP and POPB) level 6 h, 12 h, 24 h, 48 h, 72 h and 7 days postoperatively using an 11-point numerical rating scale; POPer was assessed after 7 days. Resuce-analgesic intake (RAI) and flare-up incidence (FUI) were recorded. Data were statistically analyzed.

RESULTS

Both groups had similar baseline characteristics (P > 0.05). Piroxicam showed less POP intensity and incidence than placebo at 6, 12 and 24 h, less POPB intensity and incidence at all timepoints, less POPer intensity and incidence and less RAI (p > 0.05), but similar FUI (P > 0.05). A significant rise in pain compared to baseline occurred with placebo from 6 to 72 h for POP and to 7 days with POPB (p > 0.05); such rise was not detected with piroxicam. POPB showed higher pain intensity than POP at all time points (p < 0.05). No swelling or adverse effects occured.

CONCLUSIONS

A preoperative single dose of sublingual fast-dissolving piroxicam can be effective in reducing spontaneous pain up to 24 h, stimulated pain up to 7 days, and RAI incidence in asymptomatic mandibular molars with non-vital pulp; it can prevent rise in POP and POPB postoperatively. Stimulated postoperative pain can be more severe and longer lasting than spontaneous pain.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT03998826 (2019).

Influence of occlusal surface reduction on post endodontic pain following instrumentation and obturation: A randomized double blinded clinical study

Objective

The purpose of this randomized clinical study was to investigate the influence of occlusal surface reduction on postendodontic pain.

Methodology

Sixty patients were included with a diagnosis of acute irreversible pulpitis and acute apical periodontitis and divided randomly into two groups. In the intervention group, occlusal surfaces were reduced and left intact in the control group. Postoperative pain was evaluated at the 6th, 12th, 24th, and 48th h after the root canal instrumentation and 6th and 12th h following obturation using visual analog scale. Data were evaluated using the Chi-square test, t-test, Friedman test, Mann-Whitney U-test, and Wilcoxon rank test.

Results

Postoperative pain levels in both groups were reduced significantly over the time period evaluated, however, between the two groups, there was no difference evident.

Conclusion

Occlusal surface reduction did not influence the pain following root canal instrumentation and obturation.

Influence of Diclofenac Potassium versus Prednisolone on Postendodontic Pain and Pulpal Interleukin-8 Expression in Symptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis Cases: A Randomized Placebo-controlled Trial

AIM

This prospective, randomized, double-blind clinical trial investigated the impact of diclofenac potassium, prednisolone, and placebo as oral premedication on postendodontic pain and pulpal interleukin (IL)-8 expression in patients with irreversible pulpitis.

METHODS

Thirty-six patients undergoing conventional endodontic treatment were assigned into one of 3 groups (n = 12). Pulpal blood samples were taken after access cavity preparation and stored until they were analyzed using enzyme-linked immunosorbent asssay for quantification of IL-8. Postendodontic pain was scored using the visual analogue scale. Outcome data were statistically analyzed using one-way analysis of variance, Kruskal-Wallis, Friedman's, Dunn's, Chi-square, and Fisher's exact tests and Spearman's correlation coefficient. The significance level (α) was set at 0.05.

RESULTS

Apart from preoperative pain scores, all groups had similar baseline characteristics (P > .05). Immediate postendodontic pain scores had a significant difference between all groups (P < .05) where placebo group showed the highest score. There was no significant difference between all groups at 6 and 12 hours postoperatively (P > .05). Furthermore, there was no significant difference in the incidence of postendodontic pain and in mean IL-8 levels between the 3 groups (P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

The only impact the premedications had was on the immediate postendodontic pain intensity, and they had no influence on the later time points, incidence of postendodontic pain or pulpal IL-8 levels.

Efficacy of preoperative and postoperative medications in reducing pain after non-surgical root canal treatment: an umbrella review

OBJECTIVE

This study analyzed, using an umbrella review, existing systematic reviews on medications to prevent and control postoperative endodontic pain to guide professionals in choosing the most effective drug.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An electronic search in the PubMed (MEDLINE), LILACS, SciELO, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Reviews, and Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) databases retrieved 17 systematic reviews. The study included only systematic reviews of clinical trials with or without meta-analyses evaluating effectiveness of medications in reducing pain after non-surgical endodontic treatment.

RESULTS

The evidence showed that steroidal and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and opioids effectively controlled pain within six to 24 h.

CONCLUSIONS

Dexamethasone, prednisolone, paracetamol, and mainly ibuprofen provided higher postoperative pain relief. The quality of evidence of the reviews ranged from very low to high, and the risk of bias from low to high, suggesting the need for well-designed clinical trials to provide confirmatory evidence.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This review emphasizes the efficacy of developing protocols for pain control after endodontic therapy.

Assessment of Bacterial Load and Post-Endodontic Pain after One-Visit Root Canal Treatment Using Two Types of Endodontic Access Openings: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

The need for controlling bacteria and pain during root canal therapy is undeniable. This clinical trial aimed to assess whether there is a difference in colony-forming unit (CFU) reduction after instrumentation and post-endodontic pain after root canal treatment (RCT) using a traditional endodontic cavity (TEC) versus a conservative endodontic cavity (CEC). This clinical study was conducted on 89 patients designated for a single-visit RCT. Patients were allocated randomly (TEC n = 45 and CEC n = 44). The access opening was gained accordingly in each group by a single operator. A pre-instrumentation sample of root canal dentin was collected using an endodontic file; the second sample was collected similarly, right after shaping and cleaning the root canal. The CFU was calculated based on the samples collected. The pain level was recorded preoperatively and at 1, 7, and 21 days postoperatively utilizing a visual analog scale (VAS). There were no statistically significant differences in the CFU reduction between the TEC and CEC groups (p > 0.05). Additionally, there were no statistically significant differences found in postoperative pain levels between the TEC and CEC at 1, 7, and 21 days (p > 0.05). Despite the limitations of this study, both the CEC and TEC demonstrate a decrease in bacteria within the root canals and alleviate postoperative pain with no difference between them.

Postoperative pain of single-visit endodontic treatment with gutta-percha versus MTA filling: a randomized superiority trial

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pain has remained a challenge for clinicians. This randomized superiority trial compared the levels of postoperative pain following the use of gutta-percha (GP) and sealer or mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) as root canal filling materials in teeth with asymptomatic apical periodontitis.

METHODS

A total of 119 patients were initially evaluated in this two-arm, parallel-group, single-blind, superiority randomized trial. The inclusion criteria were participants aged 18-65 years with single-canal premolars diagnosed with asymptomatic apical periodontitis. The participants were finally divided into two groups using the permuted block randomization method. In the GP group (N = 46), the cleaned and shaped root canals were filled with gutta-percha and AH Plus sealer, while in the MTA group (N = 48), the cleaned and shaped root canals were filled with an MTA apical filling and a coronal gutta-percha and sealer. Patient pain level was measured 6, 12, 24, 48, and 72 h postoperatively using a 10-point visual analog scale (VAS). The data were analyzed by the chi-square, independent t, Friedman, and Mann-Whitney U tests.

RESULTS

The mean of VAS scores decreased significantly over time in both groups (P < 0.001). The mean VAS scores were significantly lower in the MTA filling group than in the other group (P < 0.05). Female patients reported higher VAS scores at 6- and 12-hour periods in both groups (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

MTA as a root canal filling material might be a valuable option for clinicians due to its low postoperative pain.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial protocol was registered at the Registry of Clinical Trials (IRCT20191104045331N1).

Clinical correlation of salivary alpha-amylase levels with pain intensity in patients undergoing emergency endodontic treatment

BACKGROUND

Pain is usually subjective and thus it is challenging to describe its characteristics such as nature, intensity, and origin. Non-invasive methods such as assessing salivary alpha-amylase (SAA) may aid the practitioner to evaluate the pain intensity. Hence, the current study aimed to correlate the levels of SAA with the pain intensity in patients presenting with varied endodontic pain levels.

METHODS

Sixty patients who presented with varied intensities of endodontic pain were selected for the present study out of which seven patients were excluded/dropped, leaving a total sample of fifty-five patients for assessment. Mandibular molar with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis without periapical pathology were included in the study. A 5ml of un-stimulated was obtained from the patients, following which the local anesthesia was administered. Root canal treatment was then performed and the pain scores at pre-operative and post-operative were recorded. Additionally, salivary samples were collected after emergency endodontic treatment and sent for sialochemical analysis. IBM.SPSS statistics software 23.0 was employed to assess the obtained data.

RESULTS

A statistically significant drop in the pain score (P < 0.001) and SAA levels (P < 0.001) were observed post-operatively in the contract to pre-operative state. A strong positive correlation was reported between SAA levels and pain scores in patients undergoing emergency endodontic treatment at both time intervals namely pre-operative (P < 0.001) and post-operative (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The results of this preliminary showed a strong association between the pain score and SAA levels in patients undergoing an emergency endodontic treatment.

Outcomes reporting in systematic reviews on non-surgical root canal treatment: A scoping review for the development of a core outcome set

BACKGROUND

Studies related to non-surgical root canal treatment are amongst the most frequently performed clinical studies in endodontics. However, heterogeneity in reporting outcomes and lack of standardization is a significant challenge to evidence synthesis and guideline development.

OBJECTIVES

The aims of the present scoping review were to (a) identify outcomes reported in systematic reviews evaluating non-surgical root canal treatment; (b) identify how and when the reported outcomes were measured; (c) assess possible selective reporting bias in the included studies. The information obtained in this study should inform the development of a core outcome set (COS) for non-surgical root canal treatment.

METHODOLOGY

Structured literature searches were performed to identify systematic reviews on non-surgical root canal treatments published in English between January 1990 and December 2020. Two reviewers undertook study selection and data extraction. Outcomes were categorized according to a healthcare taxonomy into five core areas (survival, clinical/physiological changes, life impact, resource use, and adverse events). The outcome measurement tools and length of follow-up were recorded.

RESULTS

Seventy-five systematic reviews were included, of which 40 included meta-analyses. Most reviews reported on physiological and clinical outcomes, primarily pain and/or radiographic assessment of periapical status, and a variety of measurement tools and scales were used. Few reviews focused on tooth survival, life impact, resources, and adverse events. The heterogeneity amongst the reviews was large on all parameters. Less than 40% of the reviews assessed the risk of selective reporting.

DISCUSSION

Overall aims of the included reviews were highly heterogenic; thus, outcomes and how they were measured also varied considerably. Patient-centred outcomes and the use of resources were rarely reported on.

CONCLUSIONS

Most studies reported on physiological and clinical outcomes, in particular pain and/or radiographic healing. Measurement tools, scales, thresholds, and follow-up periods varied greatly within each outcome, making comparison across studies complicated. Less than 40% of the reviews assessed risk of selective reporting; thus, selective bias could not be ruled out. The presented information on reported outcomes, measurement tools and scales, and length of follow-up may guide the planning of future research and inform the development of a COS for non-surgical root canal treatment.

Comparison of pretreatment gabapentin and pregabalin to control postoperative endodontic pain - a double-blind, randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Postoperative endodontic pain is an enigma for the dentist. This study aimed to evaluate the analgesic effect of 300 mg gabapentin or 75 mg pregabalin in reducing postoperative endodontic pain compared with a placebo.

METHODS

Ninety patients who needed root canal treatment with an initial numerical rating scale (NRS) pain score of > 4 (T0) were randomly divided into three groups (n=30). Patients were then administered either 300 mg gabapentin (group A), 75 mg pregabalin (group B), or a placebo (group C) 30 min prior to the start of endodontic treatment. A single operator performed single-visit endodontics, and pain was evaluated immediately after endodontic treatment (T1) and at 4 h (T2), 8 h (T3), 12 h (T4), 24 h (T5), 48 h (T6), and 72 h (T7) using the NRS. Ibuprofen/paracetamol (400 mg/325 mg) was administered as a rescue dose if needed.

RESULTS

Pregabalin performed significantly better when compared with gabapentin at all time points except at 72 h after treatment (P=0.170). The placebo group showed significantly higher pain scores than the other two groups. The percentage of pain relief was maximum for pregabalin (92.1%), followed by gabapentin (87.6%) and placebo (69.1%) at 72 h after treatment completion.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that pretreatment with a single dose of pregabalin and gabapentin both had greater analgesic effects than a placebo. They can be effectively used to reduce postoperative endodontic pain.

Methodological assessment and overall confidence in the results of systematic reviews with network meta-analyses in Endodontics

AIM

The aims of the study were to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews with network meta-analyses (NMAs) in Endodontics using the "A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews" (AMSTAR 2) tool, and to evaluate the overall confidence in the results of the individual reviews included in the analysis.

METHODOLOGY

Systematic reviews with NMAs within the specialty of Endodontics published in English were identified from the PubMed, EbBSCOhost and SCOPUS databases from inception to July 2021. Two reviewers were involved independently in the selection of the reviews, data extraction, methodological quality assessment and overall confidence rating. Disagreements were resolved by discussion between the reviewers to achieve consensus; if disagreements persisted, a third reviewer made the final decision. The methodological quality of the included NMAs was appraised using the AMSTAR 2 checklist, which contains 16 items. The reviewers scored each item - 'Yes' - when the item was fully addressed, 'Partial Yes' - when the item was not fully addressed, or 'No' - when the item was not addressed. The overall confidence in the results of each review was classified as 'High', 'Moderate', 'Low' or 'Critically low' based on the criteria reported by the AMSTAR 2 developers.

RESULTS

Twelve systematic reviews with NMAs were included. All the NMAs adequately reported Item 1 ("Did the research questions and inclusion criteria for the review include the components of PICO?"), Item 8 ("Did the review authors describe the included studies in adequate detail?"), Item 9 ("Did the review authors use a satisfactory technique for assessing the risk of bias (RoB) in individual studies that were included in the review?") and Item 16 ("Did the review authors report any potential sources of conflict of interest, including any funding they received for conducting the review?") , whereas only one NMA reported Item 10 adequately ("Did the review authors report on the sources of funding for the studies included in the review?"). The overall confidence in the results of eight reviews was categorised as "Critically low", one review was "Low", two reviews were "Moderate" and one review was "High".

CONCLUSION

The overall confidence in the results for the majority of systematic reviews with NMAs in Endodontics was judged to be 'Critically low' as their methodological quality was below the necessary standard. AMSTAR 2 and PRISMA for NMA guidelines are available to guide authors to produce high quality systematic reviews with NMAs and for Editors and peer-reviewers when assessing submissions to journals.

Effect of premedication on postoperative pain after root canal therapy in patients with irreversible pulpitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

This systematic review aimed to assess the effect of premedication on postoperative pain after root canal treatment in vital teeth. Five electronic databases were searched for randomized clinical trials, and two independent reviewers selected eligible studies, extracted data, and assessed the quality of studies using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Meta-analysis was conducted using the random-effects model, and the pooled effect estimate of the standardized mean difference (SMD) between premedication and placebo was calculated. Subgroup analysis was conducted based on the class and route of the drug. Studies with a high risk of bias were excluded from the sensitivity analysis. Ten trials satisfied the inclusion criteria, of which eight were included in the meta-analysis. Premedication was more effective in reducing postoperative pain than placebo at 6 hours (SMD = −1.00; 95% confidence interval [CI] = −1.33 to −0.66), 12 hours (SMD = −0.80; 95% CI = −1.05 to −0.56), and 24 hours (SMD = −0.72; 95% CI = −1.02 to −0.43). The results of the sensitivity analysis confirmed the findings of the primary analysis. Based on these results, it can be concluded that premedication is effective in reducing postoperative pain in teeth with irreversible pulpitis. However, additional quality studies are required for further validation.

Single-dose intravenous ibuprofen for acute postoperative pain in adults

BACKGROUND

Postoperative administration of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) reduces patient opioid requirements and, in turn, may reduce the incidence and severity of opioid-induced adverse events (AEs).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of single-dose intravenous (IV) ibuprofen, compared with placebo or an active comparator, for moderate-to-severe postoperative pain in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases without language restrictions: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and LILACS on 10 June 2021. We checked clinical trials registers and reference lists of retrieved articles for additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized trials that compared a single postoperative dose of intravenous (IV) ibuprofen with placebo or another active treatment, for treating acute postoperative pain in adults following any surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two review authors independently considered trials for review inclusion, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data. Our primary outcome was the number of participants in each arm achieving at least 50% pain relief over a 4- and 6-hour period. Our secondary outcomes were time to, and number of participants using rescue medication; withdrawals due to lack of efficacy, adverse events (AEs), and for any other cause; and number of participants reporting or experiencing any AE, serious AEs (SAEs), and specific NSAID-related or opioid-related AEs. We were not able to carry out any planned meta-analysis. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

Only one study met our inclusion criteria, involving 201 total participants, mostly female (mean age 42 years), undergoing primary, unilateral, distal, first metatarsal bunionectomy (with osteotomy and internal fixation). Ibuprofen 300 mg, placebo or acetaminophen 1000 mg was administered intravenously to participants reporting moderate pain intensity the day after surgery. Since we identified only one study for inclusion, we did not perform any quantitative analyses. The study was at low risk of bias for most domains. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence due to serious study limitations, indirectness and imprecision. Ibuprofen versus placebo Findings of the single study found that at both the 4-hour and 6-hour assessment period, the proportion of participants with at least 50% pain relief was 32% (24/76) for those assigned to ibuprofen and 22% (11/50) for those assigned to placebo. These findings produced a risk ratio (RR) of 1.44 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77 to 2.66 versus placebo for at least 50% of maximum pain relief over the 4-hour and 6-hour period (very low-certainty evidence). Median time to rescue medication was 101 minutes for ibuprofen and 71 minutes for placebo (1 study, 126 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The number of participants using rescue medication was not reported within the included study. During the study (1 study, 126 participants), 58/76 (76%) of participants assigned to ibuprofen and 39/50 (78%) assigned to placebo reported or experienced any adverse event (AE), (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.19; low-certainty evidence). No serious AEs (SAEs) were experienced (1 study, 126 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Ibuprofen versus active comparators Ibuprofen (300 mg) was similar to the active comparator, IV acetaminophen (1000 mg) at 4 hours and 6 hours (1 study, 126 participants). For those assigned to active control (acetaminophen), the proportion of participants with at least 50% pain relief was 35% (26/75) at 4 hours and 31% (23/75) at 6 hours. At 4 hours, these findings produced a RR of 0.91 (95% CI 0.58 to 1.43; very low-certainty evidence) versus active comparator (acetaminophen). At 6 hours, these findings produced a RR of 1.03 (95% CI 0.64 to 1.66; very low-certainty evidence) versus active comparator (acetaminophen). Median time to rescue medication was 101 minutes for ibuprofen and 125 minutes for the active comparator, acetaminophen (1 study, 151 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The number of participants using rescue medication was not reported within the included study. During the study, 8/76 (76%) of participants assigned to ibuprofen and 45/75 (60%) assigned to active control (acetaminophen) reported or experienced any AE, (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.59; very low-certainty evidence). No SAEs were experienced (1 study, 151 participants; very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to support or refute the suggestion that IV ibuprofen is effective and safe for acute postoperative pain in adults.

EFFICACY OF HEMOSTATIC AGENTS IN ENDODONTIC SURGERY: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND NETWORK META-ANALYSIS

OBJECTIVE

Adequate hemostasis is a critical step in endodontic surgery. It facilitates the procedure and affects the success and prognosis of the operation. This systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to systematically assess the efficacy of hemostatic agents in endodontic surgery and to identify the most effective ones.

METHODS

PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, ProQuest, and EBSCOhost databases were searched up to December 2020. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy of different hemostatic measures in endodontic surgery, and their risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane's randomized trial tool (RoB 2.0). Frequentist network meta-analysis was conducted, with Odds Ratios and 95% confidence intervals (OR, 95% CI) as effect estimates using the "netmeta" package in R. The quality of evidence was assessed using the CINeMA approach.

RESULTS

Six RCTs involving 353 patients (mean age 48.12 y) were included. NMA revealed that aluminum chloride achieved higher hemostatic efficacy than epinephrine (OR = 2.55, 95% CI [1.41, 4.64]), while there was non-significant difference when compared with PTFE strips + epinephrine (OR = 1.00, 95% CI [0.35, 2.90]), electrocauterization (OR = 2.67, 95% CI [0.84, 8.46]), or ferric sulfate (OR = 8.65, 95% CI [0.31, 240.92]). Of all hemostatic agents, aluminum chloride ranked first in control bleeding during endodontic surgery (P-score = 0.84), followed by PTFE strips + epinephrine (P-score = 0.80), electrocauterization (P-score = 0.34), epinephrine (P-score = 0.34), ferric sulfate (P-score = 0.18). The quality of evidence was very low.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the limited data, aluminum chloride provides better hemostasis than epinephrine, while there was no significant difference between the remaining hemostatic agents used in endodontic surgery, which could help clinicians choose the hemostatic agent that achieves adequate hemostasis. achieve adequate hemostasis. Given insufficient evidence, future RCTs addressing this evidence gap are required.

Effect of precooling injection site and cold anesthetic administration on injection pain, onset, and anesthetic efficacy in maxillary molars with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

This randomized controlled clinical trial assessed the analgesic and anesthetic effects of precooling the injection site and administration of refrigerated 2% lignocaine HCl with 1:100,000 epinephrine (LE) in maxillary molars with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis (SIP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixty patients diagnosed with SIP (preoperative pain score ≥ 85 mm) in maxillary first molars were randomly allocated to two groups. In group I (control), topical gel was applied for a minute followed by conventional LE infiltration, whereas in group II (experimental), topical ice application for 15 s and refrigerated (4-6 °C) LE administration was done prior to endodontic treatment. The primary outcome measure was anesthetic efficacy that was defined as none to weak pain (≤ 36 mm) as measured on Heft Parker visual analog scale (HP-VAS) following access cavity preparation. Pain on injection and onset constituted the secondary outcome measures. The pain on injection was measured using HP-VAS, whereas the onset of anesthesia was assessed using an electric pulp tester (EPT) which was applied on the experimental tooth every minute until no response was elicited. Mann-Whitney U test was performed to analyze the data (p < 0.01).

RESULTS

Experimental group reported a success rate of 86.6% when compared to control group (26.6%) and a statistically significant reduction on injection pain (20.0 mm vs 54.5 mm) (p < 0.01). The onset of anesthesia for experimental group was 2.4 min which was also significantly lower than control group (4.5 min) (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Cryotherapy can serve as an effective alternative to conventional anesthesia for achieving success, reduced pain, and faster onset during endodontic treatment of maxillary molars with SIP.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Precooling the injection site and cold LE administration can result in effective pulpal anesthesia during endodontic management of maxillary molars in SIP patients.

Should periodontists prescribe postoperative oral corticosteroids to control pain and swelling? A systematic review

FOCUSED CLINICAL QUESTION

In generally healthy patients receiving third molar, periodontal, or dental implant surgery, do postoperative oral corticosteroids effectively limit pain and swelling compared with placebo or alternative medications?

Effectiveness of Intracanal Cryotherapy in Root Canal Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

INTRODUCTION

The effectiveness of intracanal cryotherapy for reducing postoperative pain is unclear. The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the effect of intracanal cryotherapy on postoperative pain after root canal therapy in patients with pulpal or periradicular pathosis.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library as well as the top 3 endodontic journals for relevant articles. We included randomized controlled trials that included adults. Our main outcome was postoperative pain intensity measured with a validated scale. We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane criteria and the quality of the included studies using Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. We used a random-effects model for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Eight studies involving 810 patients were included. The overall risk of bias was moderate. Seven of 8 studies used a visual analog scale to measure pain intensity. Compared with controls, intracanal cryotherapy significantly reduced postoperative pain at 6 (mean difference = -1.37; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.61 to -2.14; P < .05; I2 = 76%; moderate-quality evidence) and 24 hours after the procedure (mean difference = -1.43; 95% confidence interval, -0.70 to -2.15; P < .05; I2 = 89%; moderate-quality evidence). There was no significant effect on pain at 48 and 72 hours and 7 days after the procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Moderate-quality evidence suggests that intracanal cryotherapy (ie, using cold saline irrigation as a final irrigant) significantly reduces the intensity of pain at 6 and 24 hours after root canal therapy. Future clinical trials assessing the effectiveness of intracanal cryotherapy are advocated.

The Safety and Efficacy of Pre- and Post-Medication for Postoperative Endo- dontic Pain: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

Background:

Postoperative Endodontic Pain is a major concern for dentists and their patients, with pain having been reported to occur in 25%–40% of patients treated. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review and Network Meta-analysis (NMA) was to identify the safety and efficacy of pre- and post-medication for reducing postoperative endodontic pain.

Methods:

A literature search was performed in the SCOPUS, MEDLINE, and ScienceDirect, and Cochrane Central databases until December 2019 with no language restriction. Randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficacy of pre- or post-medications compared with other agents, placebo, or no treatment in adult patients who underwent endodontic surgery for postoperative pain were included. The mean difference of postoperative pain was measured using the Standardized Mean Difference (SMD) with its 95% confidence interval (95% CI).

Results:

This Systematic Review included 62 Articles. Of them, 50 studies were included in the NMA. Among all medications, corticosteroids were ranked as the best treatment for the reduction of postoperative pain at 6 and 12 hours with a significant reduction in postoperative pain scores [SMD= -1.18, 95% CI (-1.51: -0.85)] and [SMD= -1.39, 95% CI (-1.77: -1.02)], respectively. Cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors were ranked as the best treatment for the reduction of postoperative pain at 8 and 24 hours with a significant reduction in postoperative pain scores [SMD= -2.86, 95% CI (-6.05: -1.66)] and [SMD= -1.27, 95% CI (-2.10: -0.43)], respectively. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) significantly reduced the postoperative pain scores in all durations. For postoperative pain at 6 hours, Indomethacin, Novafen, Naproxen, Prednisolone, Ketorolac, Betamethasone, Dexamethasone, Deflazacort, Rofecoxib, Piroxicam, and Ibuprofen significantly reduced the pain score when compared with a placebo. All of these drugs demonstrated a significant reduction at 12 hours except Ketorolac.

Conclusion:

The current evidence suggests that pre- and post-medication can reduce postoperative pain after nonsurgical root canal treatment. Corticosteroids and COX-2 inhibitors showed significant control of the pain up to 12 hours after administration. However, NSAIDs demonstrated a high efficacy from administration and until two days after treatment. Indomethacin, Novafen, prednisolone, and Naproxen were ranked first in most analyzed durations.

Effect of preoperative oral administration of steroids in comparison to an anti-inflammatory drug on postoperative pain following single-visit root canal treatment - a double-blind, randomized clinical trial

AIM

This randomized, double-blinded, clinical trial evaluated the effect of oral premedication of piroxicam, prednisolone, dexamethasone or placebo on postoperative pain after single-visit root canal treatment in teeth with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis and symptomatic apical periodontitis.

METHODOLOGY

The trial is reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for RAndomized Trials in Endodontics (PRIRATE) 2020 guidelines. The protocol was registered at the clinical trial registry (India) (CTRI/2019/06/019818). In total, 160 patients, assigned to four groups, received orally either 20 mg piroxicam, 20 mg prednisolone, 4 mg dexamethasone or a placebo 60 min before root canal treatment. Patients recorded their postoperative pain intensity at 6, 12, 24, 48 and 72 h using a 10-cm visual analogue scale. Intergroup comparison was performed using Kruskal-Wallis tests with post hoc analysis using Dunns test. Incidence of pain was analysed using chi-square tests. A P value < 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant. Binary logistic regression was used to determine the odds of postoperative pain, with incidence of pain as the dependent variable and intervention groups, gender, age and type of tooth as independent variables.

RESULTS

In total, 156 patients were analysed in the trial, since four patients dropped out during follow-up. All drugs were associated with a significantly lower incidence of postoperative pain compared to the placebo at 6 h (P = 0.009), 12 h (P = 0.003) and 24 h (P = 0.008). Mean intensity of pain was significantly more intense at 6, 12 and 24 h with the use of placebo in comparison to the other three intervention groups (P < 0.05). Intensity of pain was not significantly different between the premedications used (P > 0.05). One patient in the piroxicam group reported gastritis, whereas no adverse effects were recorded in other groups.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative oral administration of a single dose of 4 mg dexamethasone, 20 mg piroxicam or 20 mg prednisolone reduced the incidence and severity of postoperative pain following single-visit root canal treatment compared to a placebo in patients with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis and symptomatic apical periodontitis up to 24 h. The odds of postoperative pain at 24 h for patients premedicated with 4 mg dexamethasone or 20 mg piroxicam or 20 mg prednisolone were 5.3 times, 3.4 times and 2.5 times less compared to the placebo, respectively.

Effect of occlusal reduction on postendodontic pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials

The purpose of this systematic review was to assess the effect of occlusal reduction on post-operative pain following root canal treatment and was performed in accordance with the PRISMA statement being registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42018089941). Two reviewers independently conducted a systematic literature search in the PubMed (MEDLINE), Dentistry & Oral Sciences Source and the Cochrane Library databases. Seven studies were included, of which three were used to perform meta-analysis for 6 days post-operative and the rest for qualitative synthesis. Three studies were assessed as low risk of bias, three as some concern, and one as high risk of bias. Occlusal reduction diminishes the post-operative pain (SMD -1.10 (95%CI -2.06, -0.15) I2  = 96.9%) at 6 days for teeth diagnosed as irreversible pulpitis, and, overall, likely reduces post-operative pain for patients presenting with irreversible pulpitis and/or symptomatic apical periodontitis. Future high-quality clinical trials are needed to better understand the role of occlusal reduction.

Systematic Review on the Role of Lasers in Endodontic Therapy: Valuable Adjunct Treatment?

(1) Background: Adjunctive instruments, such as lasers have been investigated to address the risk of failure of endodontic therapy due to the complexity of the root canal system. Lasers have been used therapeutically, in direct irradiation of the root canals or adjunct to irrigants placed into the canals, in combination with a photosensitizer (antimicrobial photodynamic therapy) and in pain management (photobiomodulation). The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the evidence in clinical use within these three areas of therapy. (2) Methods: PubMed, Cochrane and Scopus search engines were used to identify human clinical trials regarding the use of lasers in endodontic therapy. (3) Results: After applying the keywords and additional filters, inclusion and exclusion criteria, the initial number of 1486 articles was reduced to 17. It was revealed that almost all studies (14/17) presented a statistically significant improved outcome in laser-assisted endodontic therapy, with the remaining three not showing any adverse effects. (4) Conclusions: The use of laser photonic energy of appropriate delivered parameters can be proposed as useful adjunctive when considering optimal treatment modalities in orthograde endodontics. Additionally, a tendency of research towards pain modulation in this field is developing.

Post-treatment endodontic pain following occlusal reduction in mandibular posterior teeth with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis and sensitivity to percussion: a single-centre randomized controlled trial

AIM

This randomized, prospective, controlled trial assessed the effect of occlusal reduction on post-treatment endodontic pain and medication intake following root canal treatment of mandibular posterior teeth with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis with sensitivity to percussion treated in two visits.

METHODOLOGY

Three hundred and eight patients were randomly assigned into two equal groups according to whether occlusal reduction was done or not (n = 154). For all patients, root canal treatment was carried out in two visits without intracanal medication. Patients assessed their pain using the 0-10 numerical rating scale (NRS) 6, 12, 24 and 48 h after the first visit (post-instrumentation) and 6 and 12 h following root canal filling (post-obturation). Patients, also, recorded their medication intake (sham or analgesic), post-instrumentation and post-obturation; patients initially received a sham capsule, but, if pain persisted, an analgesic was prescribed. Data were analysed using Mann-Whitney U-test, Friedman's test, Wilcoxon's rank test and chi-square (χ² ) test. The relative risk (RR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated for binary data.

RESULTS

Occlusal reduction was associated with lower pain intensity than no occlusal reduction at 12 and 24 h post-instrumentation (P < 0.05). Pain intensity significantly and gradually decreased with both groups at all post-instrumentation and post-obturation time-points compared to preoperative pain (P < 0.05). The RR of moderate-to-severe pain was 0.61 (95% CI: 0.41, 0.91) 12 h post-instrumentation, and the RR of pain incidence, regardless of its level, was 0.75 (95% CI: 0.61, 0.92) 24 h post-instrumentation. There was no significant difference in medication intake (sham or analgesic) between groups (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Occlusal reduction was effective in reducing the intensity of postoperative pain 12 h and 24 h after root canal instrumentation in the first visit in patients with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis with sensitivity to percussion. Occlusal reduction lowered the risk of moderate-to-severe pain by about 40% 12 h post-instrumentation and the overall risk of pain by 25% 24 h post-instrumentation; yet, it did not affect medication intake.

Effect of Diclofenac Potassium Premedication on Postendodontic Pain in Mandibular Molars with Symptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis: A Randomized Placebo-Controlled Double-Blind Trial

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this prospective, randomized, double-blind clinical trial was to evaluate the effect of a preoperative, single, oral dose of diclofenac potassium (DFK) on postoperative pain and rescue analgesic intake in patients with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis in mandibular molars treated in 1 visit.

METHODS

Seventy emergency patients with moderate to severe preoperative pain randomly received either 50 mg DFK or placebo tablets 1 hour before starting endodontic treatment (n = 35 per group). Patients recorded their pain level 6, 12, 24, and 48 hours after treatment on a 170-mm Heft-Parker visual analog scale. The incidence of rescue analgesic intake was also recorded. Outcome data were statistically analyzed using Mann-Whitney U, Friedman, Wilcoxon signed rank, and chi-square tests. Binary logistic regression assessed the association of predisposing factors with postoperative pain. The significance level (α) was set at 0.05.

RESULTS

Of the 70 patients, 68 were analyzed (n = 34 per group). Both groups had similar baseline characteristics (P > .05). DFK showed significantly less pain incidence and intensity than the placebo at 48 hours only (P < .05). A significant decrease occurred from 24 to 48 hours with DFK (P < .05), which was not recorded with the placebo (P > .05). No difference in the incidence of rescue analgesic intake was reported between groups (P > .05). Food intake timing, sex, and rescue analgesic intake were associated with postoperative pain (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Premedication by a single, oral dose of 50 mg DFK could be effective in reducing postendodontic pain at 48 hours after 1-visit endodontic treatment in mandibular molars with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis.

PRISMA for abstracts: best practice for reporting abstracts of systematic reviews in Endodontology

An abstract is a brief overview of a scientific, clinical or review manuscript as well as a stand-alone summary of a conference abstract. Scientists, clinician-scientists and clinicians rely on the summary information provided in the abstracts of systematic reviews to assist in subsequent clinical decision-making. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) for Abstracts checklist was developed to improve the quality, accuracy and completeness of abstracts associated with systematic reviews and meta-analyses. The PRISMA for Abstracts checklist provides a framework for authors to follow, which helps them provide in the abstract the key information from the systematic review that is required by stakeholders. The PRISMA for Abstracts checklist contains 12 items (title, objectives, eligibility criteria, information sources, risk of bias, included studies, synthesis of results, description of the effect, strength and limitations, interpretation, funding and systematic review registration) under six sections (title, background, methods, results, discussion, other). The current article highlights the relevance and importance of the items in the PRISMA for Abstracts checklist to the specialty of Endodontology, while offering explanations and specific examples to assist authors when writing abstracts for systematic reviews when reported in manuscripts or submitted to conferences. Strict adherence to the PRISMA for Abstracts checklist by authors, reviewers, and journal editors will result in the consistent publication of high-quality abstracts within Endodontology. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.