Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29196831›Full record

SynthesisLasers in medical science2018

Laser for bone healing after oral surgery: systematic review.

Claudio Noba, Anna Carolina Volpi Mello-Moura, Thais Gimenez, Tamara Kerber Tedesco, Cacio Moura-Netto

Registry-linked trialAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Lasers in medical science, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05344222 (Effects of Photobiomodulation Conditioning of Orofacial Tissue in Surgery for Removal of Impacted Mandibular Third Molars), which is not on this map. Cited by 29 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT05344222 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Effects of Photobiomodulation Conditioning of Orofacial Tissue in Surgery for Removal of Impacted Mandibular Third Molars: Randomized, Sham-controlled, Double-blind Clinical Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of Nove de JulhoRan2021 to 2022Enrolled62ConditionsImpacted Third Molar ToothArmsInfrared LED, Similar device - Infrared ED
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Claudio NobaDentistry Post Graduation Program, Universidade Cruzeiro do Sul, São Paulo, Brazil.
Anna Carolina Volpi Mello-MouraDentistry Post Graduation Program, Universidade Ibirapuera, Av. Interlagos, 1329 - Chácara Flora, São Paulo, SP, 04661-100, Brazil.
Thais GimenezDentistry Post Graduation Program, Universidade Ibirapuera, Av. Interlagos, 1329 - Chácara Flora, São Paulo, SP, 04661-100, Brazil. thais.gimenez@usp.br.
Tamara Kerber TedescoDentistry Post Graduation Program, Universidade Ibirapuera, Av. Interlagos, 1329 - Chácara Flora, São Paulo, SP, 04661-100, Brazil.
Cacio Moura-NettoDentistry Post Graduation Program, Universidade Cruzeiro do Sul, São Paulo, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to perform a systematic review on the use of lasers in oral surgery for bone healing. Selection of articles was carried out by two evaluators in Pubmed and Web of Science databases for published articles and OpenGray for gray literature. Search strategy was developed based on the PICO Question "Does the use of lasers after oral surgery improve bone healing?". Eligibility criteria were: being on laser; evaluate bone healing; involve oral surgery; do not be about implant, periodontics, orthodontics, osteonecrosis or radiotherapy, nor revisions, clinical cases, etc. Data were collected from each article in a structured spreadsheet and a descriptive analysis was performed. Risk assessment of bias of the articles was carried out through the tool elaborated by the Cochrane collaboration. A total of 827 potentially relevant references were identified. No articles were found in OpenGray. Eleven articles met the eligibility criteria and were included in the systematic review. Most of studies were in vivo and in jaw, being conducted with low-power lasers which were applied immediately after the surgical procedure of extraction. Neoformation and bone density were the outcomes of choice and there was a tendency of increase in bone density, neoformation, regeneration, mineralization, or bone condensation when laser was applied. Regarding the bias risk assessment, studies were not clear in reporting most of the parameters. Low-power laser therapy seems to reduce time of bone healing in oral surgery, although there are no defined protocols and the level of evidence is still considered weak.

Indexed as

LasersOral Surgical ProceduresBone and BonesHumansPublication BiasRisk FactorsWound HealingBone regenerationLasersOral surgerySystematic review

Identifiers

PMID29196831

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.