Is phototherapy effective in the management of post-operative endodontic pain? A systematic review of randomized controlled clinical trials

Efficacy of laser adjuvant therapy in the management of post-operative endodontic pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Postoperative endodontic pain (PEP) is crucial in clinical practice. Recently, the effects of various laser adjuvant therapies in endodontic treatments have been widely evaluated. However, as a virtually side-effect-free treatment, its effect on postoperative pain management during endodontic treatment remains controversial.

OBJECTIVES

This review aimed to compare the efficacy of laser adjuvant therapy for pain management after endodontic treatment.

METHOD

The Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science databases were systematically searched for articles published until 12 February 2023. The risk of bias in the included studies was evaluated based on the Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment tool. Data on continuous outcomes of visual analogue scale pain scores are expressed as standard mean difference (SMD) and dichotomous outcomes of pain prevalence as relative risk (RR).

RESULTS

We included 22 studies, of which 15 enrolled 892 patients with visual analogue scale pain scores and 7 enrolled 422 patients with pain prevalence. Of the 22 studies, seven studies had a low risk of bias, 10 had a moderate risk of bias and 5 had a high risk of bias. For pain level, the pooled outcomes indicated reduced pain scores in all laser adjuvant therapy, including low-level laser therapy (SMD = -0.86 [95% CI: -1.16, -0.55] in 24 h and SMD = -0.64 [95% CI: -0.84, -0.43] in 48 h), diode laser therapy (SMD = -0.27 [95% CI: -0.50, -0.04] in 48 h) and photodynamic therapy (SMD = -1.12 [95% CI: -2.18, -0.05] in 24 h). For postoperative pain incidence, a significant correlation was observed with reduced pain incidence rates in the photodynamic therapy group (pooled RR = 0.47 [95% CI: 0.31, 0.72]) but not in the low-level laser therapy group (RR = 0.89 [95% CI: 0.30, 2.70] at 12 h and RR = 0.57 [95% CI: 0.09, 3.72] at 24 h).

CONCLUSIONS

High-quality evidence suggests that laser adjuvant therapies such as low-level laser therapy, diode laser therapy and photodynamic therapy have a positive impact on reducing postoperative endodontic pain intensity. However, the differences in PEP management effects between laser therapies are unknown, and no significant differences were observed among the subgroups.

REGISTRATION

CRD 42023402872 (PROSPERO).

Lasers efficacy in pain management after primary and secondary endodontic treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Postoperative pain is a common concern following root canal treatments (RCT), impacting both patients and oral health practitioners. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of laser treatment modalities in reducing postoperative pain compared to conventional methods after primary and secondary RCT in permanent mature teeth. A search of three electronic databases (PubMed, ScienceDirect, and The Cochrane Library) was conducted, using a broad range of keywords and terms. Gray literature and manual searches were conducted to complement the search. The inclusion criteria included randomized clinical trials based on the objective of the secondary study. A minimum sample size of 10 participants per group and a clearly defined criterion for postoperative pain assessment were required. The characteristics of the included studies were presented as tables. The Cochrane collaboration tool RoB 2.0 was used to assess the risk of bias within each study. Two reviewers extracted the data and assessed the studies independently, and discrepancies were resolved through consultation with a third reviewer. A random-effects model was employed for meta-analysis to estimate the overall effect measure. Heterogeneity was evaluated using Cochran's Q test and the I2 index. Publication bias was explored via Funnel plots and Egger's test. Subgroup analyses and meta-regression were conducted to assess variations among laser methods and examine the influence of independent factors. The significance threshold for all analyses was set at 5% (α = 0.05). Intraoral laser therapy demonstrated no significant advantage over conventional treatments but consistently outperformed placebo, particularly from 4 to 72 h post-treatment. Low-level laser therapy provided slight pain reduction in the first 8 h, though its effectiveness diminished in retreatment scenarios. Photodynamic therapy and laser disinfection showed marginal benefits, especially shortly after treatment, with reduced efficacy in longer-term or retreatment contexts. Further research is needed to explore different applications of laser modalities and assess distinct prognostic factors in more detail.

The influence of laser-activated irrigation on post-operative pain following root canal treatment: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Synthesise evidence on post-endodontic pain (PEP) in adult teeth undergoing primary root canal treatment with the adjunctive use of laser-activated irrigation (LAI) as compared with conventional needle irrigation (CNI) during the first post-operative week.

DATA

An electronic search was performed; no language constraints or restriction on the year of publication were applied.

SOURCES

Medline, Scopus, Cochrane and PubMed on 04 June 2023 STUDY SELECTION: Randomised clinical trials (RaCTs) that evaluated PEP after LAI of endodontic irrgants were included. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were used. PEP was analysed at various time intervals until 1 week after treatment, related to the type of LAI used and the need for analgesia.

REULTS

Of the 793 articles identified through the electronic database search, 6 RaCTs were included. Qualitative review was favoured over meta-analysis due to substantial methodological heterogeneity between studies. Five studies were at high risk for bias determined by the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias 2 tool. Diode LAI demonstrated superior efficacy to needle irrigation in reducing pain 6-48 h post-treatment. The impact of LAI by photon-induced photoacoustic streaming (PIPS) was unclear and no difference was observed between PIPS and needle irrigation. However, PIPS mitigated PEP better than manual dynamic activation, sonic and ultrasonic activation. There was no difference in analgesia intake between LAI and needle irrigation groups.

CONCLUSIONS

LAI may help reduce PEP in the first 48 h. Methodological standardisation of future RaCTs on LAI would be beneficial in allowing a more accurate review with the possibility of quantitative synthesis.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

This unique synthesis used stringent criteria to reduce confounding factors and provided valuable evidence regarding PEP with different types of LAI. It helps clinicians choose an appropriate LAI technique as compared with CNI and predicts a time frame for reducing PEP.

A systematic review and meta-analysis on the effects of phototherapy on postoperative pain in conventional endodontic reintervention

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review and meta-analysis (SRM) aimed to evaluate the efficacy of laser phototherapy (LPT) on the reduction in postoperative pain (PP) of endodontic origin after conventional/non-surgical reintervention of root canals.

METHODS

This SRM was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021243500) and followed the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis. 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 the risk of bias and the GRADE tool to assess the quality of evidence.

RESULTS

Initially, 1028 articles were found, and five articles were included. Most studies were classified as "low" risk of bias. Of the five clinical studies, four showed a significant decrease in PP after endodontic reintervention in the LPT groups compared to the control group, especially in the first four days after the intervention. In symptomatic teeth with multiple roots, LPT led to less PP at 24 h (MD -0.52 [-1.03; -0.02] p = .04). However, no significant difference between the groups was found at 48 and 72 h (p > .05). The certainty of the evidence was classified as low.

CONCLUSION

Despite the limitations of this SRM, LPT was shown to be a promising alternative for reducing and controlling PP in conventional endodontic reintervention.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

The use of LPT in endodontic reintervention may be a safe and promising alternative to clinically efficacious agent for use in the management of PP in this procedure.

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.

Photodynamic therapy for root canal disinfection in endodontics: an umbrella review

To evaluate and synthesize the evidence from the individual reviews that evaluated the efficacy of PDT therapy in root canal disinfection by undertaking an umbrella review. The protocol of the review was registered in the PROSPERO database under number CRD42021214056. The literature search was conducted using the following electronic databases: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, BVS, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Embase, and Epistemonikos, from inception to July 2021. Systematic reviews that evaluated the efficacy of PDT for root canal disinfection were included. Two authors independently performed a literature search, data extraction, and quality assessment of the included studies. Any disagreements were resolved by a third reviewer. The quality of the reviews was assessed using the AMSTAR 2 tool and the final categorization of each systematic reviews was classified as of "high," "moderate," "low," or "critically low" quality. Six systematic reviews were included in the current umbrella review and all of them were graded as critically low quality. From the critically low-quality evidence available, this umbrella review showed that the efficacy of PDT in root canal disinfection remains yet undetermined.

Post-Operative Endodontic Pain Management: An Overview of Systematic Reviews on Post-Operatively Administered Oral Medications and Integrated Evidence-Based Clinical Recommendations

Endodontic treatment comprises the overall management of pre-, intra- and post-operative symptoms, including post-operative endodontic pain, considered as a complication susceptible of chronicization. Post-operative pain is very common and highly unpreventable and has a multi-factorial etiology and a potential pathogenic link to the acute inflammation of the periapical area, secondary to localized chemical, mechanical, host and/or microbial damage occurring during endodontic treatment. Considering the multitude of heterogeneous technical and pharmacological approaches proposed to control post-operative endodontic pain, the present study primarily comprised an overview of systematic reviews of systematic reviews of randomized clinical trials, summarizing findings on post-operatively administered oral medications for post-operative endodontic pain control, in order to note the most effective type and dosage of such drugs. Secondarily, a narrative review of the current evidence on technical solutions to be observed during endodontic treatment procedures, to control post-operative pain, was conducted to provide integrated evidence-based clinical recommendations for optimal post-operative endodontic pain management.

The effect of antibiotic use on endodontic post-operative pain and flare-up rate: a systematic review with meta-analysis

Aim Antibiotics are widely used to prevent flare-ups after endodontic treatment of non-vital teeth. This systematic review assessed the effect of antibiotic administration on post-endodontic treatment pain and flare-up rate.Methods Five major databases including Web of Science, Cochrane Library, PubMed, Scopus and Embase were searched to identify randomised clinical trials (RCTs) published until September 2020. Retrieved papers were critically appraised using the revised Cochrane risk of bias tool (RoB 2). To reduce the clinical heterogeneity, the included studies were divided into two groups: studies on symptomatic non-vital teeth and studies on asymptomatic non-vital teeth. The primary outcomes were 'post-operative pain' and 'flare-up rate'. The data of included studies were statistically combined through meta-analysis using random-effect model. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the quality of evidence.Results Six RCTs involving two RCTs (N = 61) on symptomatic teeth and four RCTs (N = 310) on asymptomatic teeth were included. In two RCTs on asymptomatic teeth, prophylactic antibiotic had been used, while in the remaining two RCTs, antibiotics had been administered after treatment. Quantitative synthesis of the RCTs showed that antibiotic administration following endodontic treatment of symptomatic non-vital teeth has no effect on pain severity at 24 hours following treatment (weighted mean difference [WMD] = -0.03; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.53 to 0.47), and the use of antibiotics before endodontic treatment of asymptomatic non-vital teeth has no effect on flare-up rate (relative risk [RR] = 0.58; 95% CI: 0.22-1.54). The GRADE approach revealed that the overall quality of evidence on the topic is low.Conclusions The antibiotic administration following endodontic treatment of symptomatic non-vital teeth has no effect on pain severity at 24 hours following treatment. Also, prophylactic antibiotics are ineffective in reducing the flare-up rate following treatment of asymptomatic non-vital teeth. However, to evaluate the effect of post-treatment antibiotics on flare-up rate in asymptomatic non-vital teeth, more high-quality RCTs are needed.

The Comparison of Short-Term Postoperative Pain in Single- versus Multiple-Visit Root Canal Treatment: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Study

Postoperative pain after root canal therapy (RoCT) is an unpleasant experience for patients, and it could be affected by different factors. The times of visits could be one of these factors that were evaluated in various studies. However, there is inconsistent evidence on the relation between postoperative pain and the times of visits. Therefore, the current systematic review aimed to summarize the results of these studies and meta-analyze them. For this purpose, a comprehensive search was conducted in four main databases (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus databases) for related English articles from 1978 to August 2020. The quality of studies was evaluated using the Delphi checklist. The heterogeneity of studies was determined by I2 statistic, and publication bias was assessed using the funnel plot and the Begg test. The results were presented by using relative ratio (RR) estimates and standard mean difference (SMD) with its 95% confidence intervals (CI) using a random-effects model. Initial searches from mentioned databases identified 1480 papers; of which only 27 of them met the inclusion criteria. In quality assessment, thirteen studies had quality scores of more than 7, two studies had 4 scores, and the rest had 5 scores. Overall, based on the available evidence, the meta-analysis showed that the risk of postoperative pain in single-visit was 1.02 times (CI 95% (0.99, 1.19), I2 = 60.7%, $p=0.001$ ) higher than that of the multiple-visit treatment. The mean difference of postoperative pain in single-visit was −0.30 (CI 95% (−0.36, −0.25), I2 = 0.94.4, $p=0.001$ ) compared with the multiple-visit treatment. Based on the results of this meta-analysis, the risk of postoperative pain in single-visit RoCT was higher than that in multiple-visit RoCT with acceptable statistical heterogeneity and moderate quality of the studies.

Effect of low-level laser therapy on postoperative endodontic pain: An updated systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the influence of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) on postoperative pain after endodontic treatment.

METHODS

The PICOS strategy was used to identify randomized clinical trials comparing low-level laser therapy and mock laser therapy to manage postoperative pain after endodontic treatment, retreatment, and endodontic surgery. An electronic search was performed in MEDLINE through PubMed, Web of Science, LILACS, Scopus and Cochrane Library, OpenGrey and Google Scholar. Quality assessment was performed using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing the risk of bias. The quality of evidence was rated on the basis of the GRADE approach.

RESULTS

Twelve studies were included in the qualitative synthesis. Within the 12 studies, 7 articles were classified as "low risk of bias," 4 studies were considered "unclear risk of bias" and 1 study was considered "high risk of bias." Six studies evaluated the postoperative pain after primary root canal treatment, two studies after root canal retreatment and four after periapical surgery. Most of the studies reported significantly less postoperative pain after LLLT in different time periods; two studies found no differences. The certainty of evidence was classified as low and very low to treatment / retreatment and endodontic surgery, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the limited quality evidence, most of the included studies reported significantly less postoperative pain after LLLT. However, the lack of standardization in laser parameters, use of medications and the certainty of evidence classified as low and very low indicate the need for further studies.

Effect of Low-level Laser Therapy With Different Locations of Irradiation on Postoperative Endodontic Pain in Patients With Symptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis: A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial

Introduction: This double-blind, placebo-controlled, clinical trial aimed to investigate the analgesic efficacy of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) with two different locations, and their comparison, in postoperative endodontic pain (PEP) levels in molars diagnosed with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis. Methods: Seventy-five patients with a molar tooth, diagnosed with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis, were divided into three groups of placebo, buccal only irradiation (BI), and buccal and lingual irradiation (BLI), with 25 cases being in each group. The participants received similar single-visit nonsurgical endodontic treatments. Then, a sham laser was used in the control group instead of LLLT. Individuals in BI and BLI groups received 80-second irradiation on the buccal surface and 80-second irradiation on each of the buccal and lingual surfaces respectively. A laser with an 808 nm wavelength, power of 100 mW, and a fiber diameter of 600 μm was used. PEP was assessed using a 0-100 mm VAS 4, 8, 24, and 48 hours after the treatment. Results: BLI showed a significantly higher reduction of PEP compared to placebo in all time intervals of this study. BLI was significantly more effective than BI 8 hours after the treatment. However, intragroup differences between BLI and BI groups at other time intervals and between BI and placebo groups in all time intervals were not significant. The number of taken analgesics in the BLI group was significantly lower than the placebo group and was on a statistical borderline compared to the BI group. Conclusion: LLLT with BLI was an effective measure as a supplement to oral analgesics in the reduction of PEP compared to the placebo.