• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

单次就诊的恒牙根管治疗是否比多次就诊的方法更有益?

Does single-visit root canal treatment of permanent teeth provide more benefit than a multiple-visit approach?

机构信息

Newcastle Dental Hospital, Claremont Road, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4AZ, UK.

School of Dental Sciences, Newcastle University, Framlington Place, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW, UK.

出版信息

Evid Based Dent. 2023 Jun;24(2):71-72. doi: 10.1038/s41432-023-00888-2. Epub 2023 May 15.

DOI:10.1038/s41432-023-00888-2
PMID:37188920
Abstract

DATA SOURCES

Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomised controlled trials and quasi-randomised controlled trials were included.

POPULATION

Participants aged ≥ 10 with a permanent tooth possessing a completely formed apex and without resorption; Intervention: Root canal treatment (RoCT) carried out in a single visit; Comparison: RoCT carried out over multiple visits; Outcome: Primary outcome was treatment success (retention of tooth or radiographic evidence of healing), with secondary outcomes investigating post-operative symptoms (pain, swelling, sinus tract formation).

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Standard Cochrane methods to assess internal validity were used. The Robins 1 tool (for quasi randomised controlled trials) or risk of bias (RoB) 1 tool (for randomised controlled trials) were used to assess RoB whereby a judgement was assigned as 'low', 'high' or 'unclear'. GRADE (GRADEpro GDT software) was used to assess certainty of evidence for each outcome. The certainty of evidence was defined as high, moderate, low or very low, having no downgrade, downgrade of one level, downgrade of two levels and downgrade of three or more levels, respectively. Of the various subgroups investigated to determine their relevance, only pretreatment conditions (vital teeth versus necrotic teeth) and endodontic technique (manual versus mechanical instrumentation) were available for subgroup analysis. The Cochrane's test for heterogeneity and I test were used to assess the variation in treatment effects. A random-effects model was used to combine risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous data and mean difference (MD) for continuous data. Sensitivity analysis was performed for each outcome, excluding studies at overall high or unclear RoB.

RESULTS

Forty-seven studies were included in the meta-analysis and internal validity assessment, with 5693 teeth analysed. Ten studies were found to have a low RoB, 17 with a high RoB and 20 with an unclear RoB. No evidence was identified suggesting a difference between treatment carried out in a single visit compared to a multiple visits approach for the primary outcome measure, but there was very low certainty about the findings (RR 0.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.09 to 2.50; I 2 = 0%; 2 studies, 402 teeth). No evidence was identified suggesting a difference between treatment carried out in a single visit compared to multiple visits with regards to radiological failure (RR 0.93, 95% CI: 0.81 to 1.07; I 2 = 0%; 13 studies, 1505 teeth; moderate-certainty evidence), participants reporting pain up to 72 h post obturation (RR 0.97, 95% CI: 0.81 to 1.16; I 2 = 70%; 12 studies, 1329 teeth; low-certainty evidence), pain for 72 h post obturation (MD 0.26, 95% CI: -4.76 to 5.29; I 2 = 98%; 12 studies, 1258 teeth; low-certainty evidence) or pain at 1 week post obturation (RR 1.05, 95% CI: 0.67 to 1.67; I2 = 61%; 9 studies, 1139 teeth; very low-certainty evidence). Similarly, no evidence was identified to prove that there was a difference between treatment carried out in a single visit compared to multiple visits with regards to swelling or flare-up (RR 0.56 95% CI: 0.16-1.92; I 2 = 0%; 6 studies; 605 teeth; very low-certainty evidence), analgesic use (RR 1.25 95% CI: 0.75-2.09; I 2 = 36%; 6 studies, 540 teeth; very low-certainty evidence) and sinus tract or fistula presence (RR 1.00, 95% CI: 0.24-4.28; I 2 = 0%; 5 studies, 650 teeth; very low-certainty evidence). Interestingly, however, there was evidence to show that more participants reported pain after 1 week following RoCT completed in a single visit, compared to those in multiple visit groups (RR 1.55, 95% CI: 1.14-2.09; I 2 = 18%; 5 studies, 638 teeth; moderate-certainty evidence). Subgroup analysis showed there was an increase in post-treatment pain after 1 week for RoCT carried out in a single visit on vital teeth (RR 2.16, 95% CI: 1.39-3.36; I 2 = 0%; 2 studies, 316 teeth), and with the use of mechanical instrumentation (RR 1.80, 95% CI: 1.10-2.92; I 2 = 56%; 2 studies, 278 teeth).

CONCLUSIONS

The current evidence shows that RoCT carried out in a single visit is no more effective than RoCT carried out over multiple visits; after 12 months, there is no difference in pain or complications with either approach. However, single visit RoCT has been shown to have increased post-operative pain after 1 week compared to RoCT completed over multiple visits.

摘要

资料来源

Cochrane 口腔健康试验注册库、Cochrane 图书馆对照试验中心注册库、Ovid 医学全文数据库、Ovid Embase 数据库。

研究选择

纳入随机对照试验和准随机对照试验。

人群

年龄≥ 10 岁,具有完全形成的根尖且无吸收的恒牙;干预:单次就诊行根管治疗(RoCT);比较:多次就诊行 RoCT;结局:主要结局是治疗成功率(保留牙齿或放射学愈合的证据),次要结局是调查术后症状(疼痛、肿胀、窦道形成)。

数据提取和综合

使用标准 Cochrane 方法评估内部有效性。使用 Robins 1 工具(用于准随机对照试验)或风险偏倚(RoB)1 工具(用于随机对照试验)评估 RoB,其中判断为“低”、“高”或“不清楚”。使用 GRADE(GRADEpro GDT 软件)评估每个结局的证据确定性。证据确定性定义为高、中、低或极低,无降级、一级降级、二级降级和三级或更多降级,分别。在确定其相关性的各种亚组中,只有预处理条件(活髓牙与坏死牙)和根管治疗技术(手动与机械器械)可用于亚组分析。使用 Cochrane 检验异质性和 I 检验评估治疗效果的差异。对于二分类数据,使用随机效应模型组合风险比(RR),对于连续数据,使用均数差(MD)。对每个结局进行敏感性分析,排除整体 RoB 高或不清楚的研究。

结果

47 项研究纳入荟萃分析和内部有效性评估,共分析 5693 颗牙齿。10 项研究的 RoB 较低,17 项研究的 RoB 较高,20 项研究的 RoB 不清楚。没有证据表明单次就诊与多次就诊在主要结局方面存在差异,但发现的证据确定性非常低(RR 0.46,95%置信区间(CI)0.09 至 2.50;I 2=0%;2 项研究,402 颗牙)。没有证据表明单次就诊与多次就诊在放射学失败方面存在差异(RR 0.93,95%CI:0.81 至 1.07;I 2=0%;13 项研究,1505 颗牙;中等确定性证据),术后 72 小时内报告疼痛的参与者(RR 0.97,95%CI:0.81 至 1.16;I 2=70%;12 项研究,1329 颗牙;低确定性证据),72 小时内疼痛(MD 0.26,95%CI:-4.76 至 5.29;I 2=98%;12 项研究,1258 颗牙;低确定性证据)或术后 1 周疼痛(RR 1.05,95%CI:0.67 至 1.67;I 2=61%;9 项研究,1139 颗牙;极低确定性证据)。同样,没有证据表明单次就诊与多次就诊在肿胀或炎症方面存在差异(RR 0.56,95%CI:0.16-1.92;I 2=0%;6 项研究;605 颗牙;极低确定性证据)、镇痛药物使用(RR 1.25,95%CI:0.75-2.09;I 2=36%;6 项研究,540 颗牙;极低确定性证据)和窦道或瘘管存在(RR 1.00,95%CI:0.24-4.28;I 2=0%;5 项研究,650 颗牙;极低确定性证据)。然而,有趣的是,与多次就诊组相比,单次就诊 RoCT 后更多参与者在第 1 周报告疼痛(RR 1.55,95%CI:1.14-2.09;I 2=18%;5 项研究,638 颗牙;中等确定性证据)。亚组分析显示,对于活髓牙(RR 2.16,95%CI:1.39-3.36;I 2=0%;2 项研究,316 颗牙)和使用机械器械(RR 1.80,95%CI:1.10-2.92;I 2=56%;2 项研究,278 颗牙),单次就诊 RoCT 后第 1 周的治疗后疼痛增加。

结论

目前的证据表明,单次就诊 RoCT 并不比多次就诊 RoCT 更有效;12 个月后,两种方法的疼痛或并发症无差异。然而,与多次就诊 RoCT 相比,单次就诊 RoCT 在术后第 1 周后会增加术后疼痛。

相似文献

1
Does single-visit root canal treatment of permanent teeth provide more benefit than a multiple-visit approach?单次就诊的恒牙根管治疗是否比多次就诊的方法更有益?
Evid Based Dent. 2023 Jun;24(2):71-72. doi: 10.1038/s41432-023-00888-2. Epub 2023 May 15.
2
Single versus multiple visits for endodontic treatment of permanent teeth.单次就诊与多次就诊治疗恒牙牙髓病的效果比较。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Dec 13;12(12):CD005296. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005296.pub4.
3
Single versus multiple visits for endodontic treatment of permanent teeth.恒牙牙髓治疗的单次就诊与多次就诊
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Dec 1;12(12):CD005296. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005296.pub3.
4
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.在流行地区,服用抗叶酸抗疟药物的人群中,叶酸补充剂与疟疾易感性和严重程度的关系。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217.
5
Single versus multiple visits for endodontic treatment of permanent teeth.恒牙牙髓治疗的单次就诊与多次就诊
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007 Oct 17(4):CD005296. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005296.pub2.
6
Pulpotomy versus root canal treatment in permanent teeth with spontaneous pain: comparable clinical and patient outcomes, but insufficient evidence.活髓切断术与根管治疗术治疗自发痛恒牙:临床和患者结局相当,但证据不足。
Evid Based Dent. 2023 Jun;24(2):54-56. doi: 10.1038/s41432-023-00878-4. Epub 2023 May 15.
7
Surgical techniques for the removal of mandibular wisdom teeth.下颌智齿拔除的手术技术。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Jul 26;7(7):CD004345. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004345.pub3.
8
Recall intervals for oral health in primary care patients.基层医疗患者口腔健康的召回间隔。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Oct 14;10(10):CD004346. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004346.pub5.
9
Interventions with pregnant women, new mothers and other primary caregivers for preventing early childhood caries.针对孕妇、新妈妈及其他主要照顾者预防幼儿龋齿的干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Nov 20;2019(11):CD012155. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012155.pub2.
10
Interventions with pregnant women, new mothers and other primary caregivers for preventing early childhood caries.干预孕妇、新妈妈和其他主要照顾者以预防幼儿龋齿。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024 May 16;5(5):CD012155. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012155.pub3.

引用本文的文献

1
Comparison of the Effectiveness of Single-Visit and Multi-Visit Root Canal Treatment on Healing Intraoral Sinus Tract.单次就诊与多次就诊根管治疗对口腔内窦道愈合效果的比较
Int J Dent. 2025 Jul 17;2025:4200682. doi: 10.1155/ijod/4200682. eCollection 2025.
2
Managing Internal Inflammatory Root Resorption and Perforation of a Mandibular Primary Molar: A Case Report With 15 Months Follow-Up.下颌第一乳磨牙内部炎性牙根吸收及穿孔的处理:一例随访15个月的病例报告
Clin Case Rep. 2025 May 4;13(5):e70475. doi: 10.1002/ccr3.70475. eCollection 2025 May.
3
Incidence of postoperative pain after single-visit and multiple-visit root canal therapy: a systematic review.

本文引用的文献

1
Does Calcium Hydroxide Reduce Endotoxins in Infected Root Canals? Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.氢氧化钙能否降低感染根管内的内毒素?系统评价和荟萃分析。
J Endod. 2020 Nov;46(11):1545-1558. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2020.08.002. Epub 2020 Aug 11.
2
Single-visit or multiple-visit root canal treatment: systematic review, meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.单次就诊或多次就诊根管治疗:系统评价、荟萃分析和试验序贯分析
BMJ Open. 2017 Feb 1;7(2):e013115. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013115.
3
Systems for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations I: critical appraisal of existing approaches The GRADE Working Group.
单次就诊与多次就诊根管治疗术后疼痛的发生率:一项系统评价
BMC Oral Health. 2025 Jan 8;25(1):47. doi: 10.1186/s12903-024-05412-1.
证据质量和推荐强度分级系统I:对现有方法的批判性评价 循证医学分级工作组
BMC Health Serv Res. 2004 Dec 22;4(1):38. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-4-38.