SynthesisHead & face medicine2025
Optimal needle characteristics for classical inferior alveolar nerve block anesthesia: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Head & face medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesAlthough frequently applied, inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) is associated with high rate of complications, beside its unpredictable success; partly due to improper needle choice. Evidence of the ideal needle contradicts in literature. Therefore, this review aims to assess the effect of needle characteristics on the outcomes of IANB. MATERIALS AND
methodsA systematic search was performed on MedLine via Pubmed, Cochrane Library, LILACS, Science Open, EBSCOhost, Scopus, Egyptian Knowledge Bank (EKB), and Google scholar; beside searching grey literature and hand searching. The review included randomized controlled trials comparing needles of difference in any of the characteristics (gauge, length, bevel, alloy) used for IANB regarding their effects on pain, success of anesthesia and aspiration. The authors ran the search, selected the eligible studies, assessed the risk of bias using RoB 1 and extracted the data of the finally included studies. All the steps were performed in duplicates.
resultsThe search yielded a total of 2,812 records. After de-duplication and excluding ineligible studies by title and abstract then by full text, the review included nine eligible studies. The compared needle interventions included: gauges (23G, 24G, 25G, 26G, 27G and 30G), lengths (12 mm, 25 mm, 32 mm, 35 mm, 42 mm), and internal diameters (0.265 mm, 0.215 mm, 0.3 mm and 0.4 mm). All studies had high risk of bias, adopted different assessment methods for the outcomes, and included participants with differences in baseline characteristics.
conclusionsThe level of the available evidence introduced by primary studies hinder concluding the optimal needle characteristics; keeping the research question unanswered. However, within the limitations of the heterogenous studies, available data favors thinner needles for less pain during needle insertion; otherwise, data of the other outcomes was inconclusive. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Thinner needles are favored for less pain during insertion; but standardized future studies are essentially needed for solid conclusions. A detailed standard protocol is, therefore, proposed.
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.