SynthesisClinical oral investigations2021
A meta-analysis on the efficacy of the ropivacaine infiltration in comparison with other dental anesthetics.
Synthesis in Clinical oral investigations, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Apatinib Inhibits the Metabolic Clearance of Ropivacaine: An in vitro and in vivo Evaluation.Drug design, development and therapy · 2026Article
- Local Tramadol Improves the Anesthetic Success in Patients with Symptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis: A Meta-Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Dexamethasone Increases the Anesthetic Success in Patients with Symptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis: A Meta-Analysis.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- The Effects of Periarticular Injection Cocktail in Postoperative Analgesia after Bilateral Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the clinical efficacy and safety profile of ropivacaine in comparison with other dental anesthetics in different clinical conditions. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis meta-analysis was registered in the National Institute for Health Research PROSPERO (ID: CRD42020205580). PubMed and Scholar Google were consulted to identify clinical trials using ropivacaine in comparison with other local anesthetic drugs for any dental procedure. Articles comparing ropivacaine and other dental anesthetics were assessed with the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool. Data from reports without a high risk of bias were extracted (anesthetic and adverse effects) and analyzed using the Review Manager Software 5.3. for Windows and the Risk Reduction Calculator.
resultsRopivacaine produces a longer anesthetic time when compared with lidocaine/adrenaline (n = 260; p = 0.00001) and similar anesthesia than bupivacaine (n = 190).
conclusionsData of this study indicate that ropivacaine infiltration produces a longer anesthetic time when compared with lidocaine and articaine but not when compared to bupivacaine in dental procedures. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Ropivacaine was more effective than lidocaine for dental anesthesia. For this reason, the manufacture of a ropivacaine dental cartridge with a suitable concentration could be an important advancement for clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.