Kulkarni Sachin, George Roy, Love Robert, Ranjitkar Sarbin
School of Medicine and Dentistry, Griffith University, Southport, Gold Coast, QLD, 4215, Australia.
Adelaide Dental School, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Lasers Med Sci. 2022 Sep;37(7):3011-3019. doi: 10.1007/s10103-022-03590-4. Epub 2022 Jun 14.
Photobiomodulation (PBM) is reported in many studies to produce dental analgesia without producing thermal damage to tissues. This systematic review aims to assess in vivo studies to support the statement that PBM can produce dental analgesia.
A systematic search strategy was constructed, and PubMed, Scopus, and Embase databases were searched. Subsequently, inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied, reference lists were scanned, and hand searched to identify other suitable studies.
Five studies met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis was not undertaken due to the heterogenous nature of the studies and data. Positive analgesia outcome was obtained in four out of five studies, and one study with no significant results was criticized for poor reporting of laser parameters, small sample size (six).
In general, all studies were criticized for poor discussion of all covariates that could have modified the results, consequently resulting in poor quality of evidence, moderate risk of bias, and poor internal validity, as well as external validity. The systematic review also discussed the potential implications of all variables to be considered for future trials, including pulsing mode, contact modes, and tooth characteristics.
许多研究报告称,光生物调节作用(PBM)可产生牙齿镇痛效果,且不会对组织造成热损伤。本系统评价旨在评估支持PBM可产生牙齿镇痛效果这一说法的体内研究。
构建系统检索策略,检索了PubMed、Scopus和Embase数据库。随后,应用纳入和排除标准,浏览参考文献列表,并进行手工检索以识别其他合适的研究。
五项研究符合纳入标准。由于研究和数据的异质性,未进行荟萃分析。五项研究中有四项获得了积极的镇痛结果,一项无显著结果的研究因激光参数报告不佳、样本量小(六例)而受到批评。
总体而言,所有研究都因对所有可能改变结果的协变量讨论不足而受到批评,从而导致证据质量差、偏倚风险中等、内部效度差以及外部效度差。该系统评价还讨论了未来试验中所有需考虑变量的潜在影响,包括脉冲模式、接触模式和牙齿特征。