Spivakovsky Silvia
New York University, College of Dentistry, New York, USA.
Evid Based Dent. 2018 Oct;19(3):92. doi: 10.1038/sj.ebd.6401331.
Data sourcesMedline, Embase, Scopus and Scielo were searched until April 2017 supplemented by manual searching.Study selectionClinical trials with parallel-groups, crossover and split mouth in patients older than 18 years were included with no language restrictions. The primary outcome considered was changes in pain intensity, while the secondary outcome was changes on onset time.Data extraction and synthesisTwo authors extracted data using a standard data form. Inter-rater reliability was calculated as high. For the primary outcome all scales were converted to a 0-100 scale. For the secondary outcome all measures were normalised in minutes. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration tool. The treatment effect was calculated using mean differences and 95% confidence interval. Heterogeneity and sensitivity analysis were performed. Data were combined using a random effect model.ResultsFourteen studies were included in the review. Of those nine were included in a meta-analysis for the primary outcome pain showing no significant reduction: -7.38 (-15.67-0.91) for normal tissue (five studies) and -4.41 (-15.25-6.43) for inflamed tissue on four studies. No statistically significant results were found in the block (three studies) or the infiltration groups (seven studies). Four studies were included in a meta-analysis for onset time. Significant reduction was achieved for inferior alveolar nerve blocks: -1.26 (-1.41 to -1.10) on three studies and when used on inflamed tissue: -1.37 (-2.03 to -0.70) from one study. High degree of heterogeneity was observed in all groups.ConclusionsThe authors concluded that buffered lidocaine does not reduce pain from injection and the onset time reduction in inferior alveolar nerve blocks and in inflamed tissues while the magnitude of the reduction is not clinically relevant.
数据来源
检索了Medline、Embase、Scopus和Scielo数据库至2017年4月,并辅以手工检索。
研究选择
纳入18岁以上患者的平行组、交叉和分口临床试验,无语言限制。主要结局为疼痛强度变化,次要结局为起效时间变化。
数据提取与合成
两位作者使用标准数据表格提取数据。计算得出评分者间信度较高。对于主要结局,所有量表均转换为0 - 100量表。对于次要结局,所有测量值均以分钟为单位进行标准化。使用Cochrane协作工具评估偏倚风险。使用均值差异和95%置信区间计算治疗效果。进行了异质性和敏感性分析。数据采用随机效应模型合并。
结果
该综述纳入了14项研究。其中9项纳入了主要结局疼痛的荟萃分析,结果显示无显著减轻:正常组织(5项研究)为-7.38(-15.67 - 0.91),炎症组织(4项研究)为-4.41(-15.25 - 6.43)。在阻滞组(3项研究)或浸润组(7项研究)中未发现统计学显著结果。4项研究纳入了起效时间的荟萃分析。在下牙槽神经阻滞方面有显著缩短:3项研究为-1.26(-1.41至-1.10),在炎症组织中使用时:1项研究为-1.37(-2.03至-0.70)。所有组均观察到高度异质性。
结论
作者得出结论,缓冲利多卡因不能减轻注射疼痛以及在下牙槽神经阻滞和炎症组织中缩短起效时间,且缩短幅度在临床上不相关。