AIM: To identify whether articaine or lidocaine is the most appropriate local anaesthetic solution for teeth with irreversible pulpitis undergoing root canal treatment.
DATA SOURCE: The protocol of this umbrella review is registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42019137624). PubMed, EBSCHO host and Scopus databases were searched until June 2019.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS: Systematic reviews published in English comparing the effectiveness of local anaesthesia following administration of articaine or lidocaine in patients undergoing root canal treatment of teeth diagnosed with irreversible pulpitis were included. Two independent reviewers selected the studies and carried out the data extraction and the appraisal of the included reviews. Disagreements were resolved in consultation with a third reviewer.
STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: The quality of the included reviews was appraised by two independent reviewers using the AMSTAR tool (a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews). Each of the 11 AMSTAR items was given a score of 1 if the specific criterion was met, or 0 if the criterion was not met or the information was unclear.
RESULTS: Five systematic reviews with meta-analyses were included. The AMSTAR score for the reviews ranged from 8 to 11, out of a maximum score of 11, and all reviews were categorized as 'high' quality. Two reviews scored 0 for item 8 in AMSTAR because the scientific quality of the clinical trials included in these reviews was not used in the formulation of the conclusions.
LIMITATIONS: Systematic reviews published only in the English language were included. Only a small number of studies were available to assess pain intensity during the injection phase, the time until the onset of anaesthesia and the occurrence of adverse events.
CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS: Articaine is more effective than lidocaine for local anaesthesia of teeth with irreversible pulpitis undergoing root canal treatment. There is limited evidence that injection of articaine is less painful, has more rapid onset and has fewer adverse events compared with lidocaine.
METHODS: Three databases were searched to identify randomized clinical trials (RCTs) published up until September 2017. Retrieved RCTs were evaluated using the revised Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. The primary efficacy outcome of interest was the success rate of IANB anesthesia. Meta-analytic estimates (risk ratio [RR] with 95% confidence intervals [CIs]) performed using a random effects model and publication bias determined using funnel plot analysis were assessed. Random errors were evaluated with trial sequential analyses, and the quality of evidence was appraised using a Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.
RESULTS: Thirteen RCTs (N = 1034) were included. Eight studies had low risk of bias. Statistical analysis of good-quality RCTs showed a significant beneficial effect of any NSAID in increasing the anesthetic success of IANBs compared with placebo (RR = 1.92; 95% CI, 1.55-2.38). Subgroup analyses showed a similar beneficial effect for ibuprofen, diclofenac, and ketorolac (RR = 1.83 [95% CI, 1.43-2.35], RR = 2.56 [95% CI, 1.46-4.50], and RR = 2.07 [95% CI, 1.47-2.90], respectively). Dose-dependent ibuprofen >400 mg/d (RR = 1.85; 95% CI, 1.39-2.45) was shown to be effective; however, ibuprofen ≤400 mg/d showed no association (RR = 1.78; 95% CI, 0.90-3.55). TSA confirmed conclusive evidence for a beneficial effect of NSAIDs for IANB premedication. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach did not reveal any concerns regarding the quality of the results.
CONCLUSIONS: Oral premedication with NSAIDs and ibuprofen (>400 mg/d) increased the anesthetic success of IANBs in patients with irreversible pulpitis.
DESIGN: Dental pulp from extracted human permanent teeth was processed for fluorescence immunohistochemistry. Ten asymptomatic (normal) and 10 symptomatic (symptoms associated with pulpitis) teeth were used in this study. Nerve fibers were identified by immunostaining for a marker, protein gene product 9.5, and the cells were counterstained with 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole. An anti-TRPV4 antibody was used to trace TRPV4 expression.
RESULTS: TRPV4 expression was co-localized with the nerve fiber marker. Immunoreactivity for TRPV4 was more intense (p
RESULTS: It was seen from the results of the study that the first-choice antibiotics for 67.8% of dentists were found to be the β-lactam group while sulfonamides and tetracyclines at 20% were the second most prescribed group. Another important finding was that 45.6% of dentists ignored hypersensitivity testing before prescription of antibiotics even though 83.3% of the total dentists interviewed were aware of the increase in antibiotic resistance.
CONCLUSION: In conclusion, the dentists are partially aware of the guidelines but need further training and education on antimicrobial prescription that enables evidence-based decision-making for better practices and outcomes.