Dermata Anastasia, Davidopoulou Sotiria, Arhakis Aristidis, Dabarakis Nikolaos, Arapostathis Konstantinos N, Kalfas Sotirios
Pediatric Dentistry Department, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 54124 Thessaloniki, Greece.
Operative Dentistry Department, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 54124 Thessaloniki, Greece.
Dent J (Basel). 2025 Jul 18;13(7):326. doi: 10.3390/dj13070326.
: The main purpose of the present scoping review was to map and explore the efficacy of computer-controlled intraosseous anesthesia (CCIA) in comparison with conventional dental anesthesia in pediatric dental patients. Secondarily, this study aimed to compare the acceptance and preference factors between CCIA and conventional dental anesthesia in children. Given the limited and heterogeneous nature of the available literature, this review aimed to identify gaps and scope the extent of research conducted in this area, providing a foundation for future, more targeted studies. : The search was conducted in 19 electronic databases, and the appropriate studies were identified according to PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Only split-mouth randomized controlled clinical trials that reported on the clinical outcomes of CCIA in children were included. Two reviewers worked independently on the screening and selection of the studies. The same two reviewers carried out the data extraction and the risk of bias assessment, using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Due to the exploratory nature, this review focused on mapping the characteristics, outcomes, and research trends rather than synthesizing effect sizes. : Out of 841 papers, 2 randomized clinical trials were ultimately included in the scoping review. The outcomes were categorized as primary (including results that answered the focus question) and secondary (relating to additional quality characteristics). Regarding the primary outcomes, in both studies, intraosseous anesthesia was efficacious in achieving the adequate level of anesthesia. One of the secondary outcomes was the acceptance and preference of CCIA in comparison with conventional dental anesthesia in children. The limited number and the high risk of bias in existing studies highlight the necessity for more comprehensive and high-quality research. : The selected studies support the assertion that CCIA is a promising technique since it results in less pain perception and is preferred by patients compared to conventional local anesthesia. However, the existing literature is limited and at high risk of bias. Thus, further targeted investigations are needed to evaluate and yield more definitive results regarding the superiority of CCIA.
本综述的主要目的是描绘并探索计算机控制骨内麻醉（CCIA）相较于传统牙科麻醉在儿童牙科患者中的疗效。其次，本研究旨在比较儿童对CCIA和传统牙科麻醉的接受度及偏好因素。鉴于现有文献数量有限且性质各异，本综述旨在找出该领域研究的差距并界定研究范围，为未来更具针对性的研究奠定基础。检索在19个电子数据库中进行，并根据PRISMA-ScR指南确定合适的研究。仅纳入报告了儿童CCIA临床结果的口内随机对照临床试验。两名审阅者独立进行研究的筛选和选择。同样的两名审阅者使用Cochrane偏倚风险工具进行数据提取和偏倚风险评估。由于本综述具有探索性质，重点在于描绘特征、结果和研究趋势，而非综合效应大小。在841篇论文中，最终有2项随机临床试验被纳入本综述。结果分为主要结果（包括回答焦点问题的结果）和次要结果（与其他质量特征相关）。关于主要结果，在两项研究中，骨内麻醉在实现足够麻醉水平方面均有效。次要结果之一是儿童对CCIA与传统牙科麻醉的接受度和偏好。现有研究数量有限且偏倚风险高，凸显了进行更全面、高质量研究的必要性。所选研究支持以下观点：CCIA是一种有前景的技术，因为与传统局部麻醉相比，它能减少疼痛感知且更受患者青睐。然而，现有文献有限且偏倚风险高。因此，需要进一步开展针对性研究，以评估CCIA的优越性并得出更明确的结果。
