Department of Dentistry, School of Dentistry, National Taiwan University and National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
J Clin Periodontol. 2013 Jan;40(1):53-64. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.12011. Epub 2012 Oct 11.
Dentin hypersensitivity, caused by the exposure and patency of dentinal tubules, can affect patients' quality of life. The aim of this study was to undertake a systematic review and a network meta-analysis, comparing the effectiveness in resolving dentin hypersensitivity among different in-office desensitizing treatments.
A literature search was performed with electronic databases and by hand until December 2011. The included trials were divided into six treatment groups as placebo, physical occlusion, chemical occlusion, nerve desensitization, laser therapy and combined treatments. The treatment effects between groups were estimated with standardized mean differences by using a Bayesian network meta-analysis.
Forty studies were included. The standardized mean difference between placebo and physical occlusion was -2.57 [95% credible interval (CI): -4.24 to -0.94]; placebo versus chemical occlusion was -2.33 (95% CI: -3.65 to -1.04); placebo versus nerve desensitization was -1.72 (95% CI: -4.00 to 0.52); placebo versus laser therapy was -2.81 (95% CI: -4.41 to -1.24); placebo versus combined treatment was -3.47 (95% CI: -5.99 to -0.96). The comparisons of the five active treatments showed no significant differences.
The results from network meta-analysis showed that most active treatment options had significantly better treatment outcome than placebo.
牙本质过敏症是由于牙本质小管暴露和开放引起的，会影响患者的生活质量。本研究旨在进行系统评价和网络荟萃分析，比较不同诊室脱敏治疗缓解牙本质过敏的效果。
检索电子数据库和手工检索直至 2011 年 12 月。将纳入的试验分为六组治疗：安慰剂、物理封闭、化学封闭、神经脱敏、激光治疗和联合治疗。采用贝叶斯网络荟萃分析，用标准化均数差估计组间治疗效果。
共纳入 40 项研究。安慰剂与物理封闭组之间的标准化均数差为-2.57（95%可信区间：-4.24 至-0.94）；安慰剂与化学封闭组之间的差异为-2.33（95%可信区间：-3.65 至-1.04）；安慰剂与神经脱敏组之间的差异为-1.72（95%可信区间：-4.00 至 0.52）；安慰剂与激光治疗组之间的差异为-2.81（95%可信区间：-4.41 至-1.24）；安慰剂与联合治疗组之间的差异为-3.47（95%可信区间：-5.99 至-0.96）。五项活性治疗的比较显示无显著差异。
网络荟萃分析结果表明，大多数活性治疗选择的治疗效果明显优于安慰剂。
