ReviewThe Japanese dental science review2026
Determining the optimal irrigation activation or agitation techniques for postoperative pain control: A network meta-regression of clinical trials.
Review in The Japanese dental science review, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparative efficacy of irrigation activation systems in root canal cleanliness: a region-specific analysis of debris and smear layer removal.Lasers in medical science · 2026Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Postoperative pain after root canal treatment remains a frequent clinical problem despite advances in instruments and irrigants. This Bayesian systematic review and network meta-regression compared seven irrigation activation/agitation techniques-positive pressure, manual dynamic, sonic, ultrasonic, multisonic, negative-pressure and laser-activated irrigation-with respect to Day-1 postoperative pain. Electronic searches of PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus and Web of Science were conducted up to 10 December 2024; 57 trials (2595 patients) were included qualitatively and 31 contributed to the quantitative network. Pain scores were rescaled to a 0-10 scale and analysed as mean differences, with symptomatic status modelled as an ordinal covariate and treatment rankings summarised using SUCRA values. Laser-activated irrigation (LAI) produced the lowest Day-1 pain and showed a clinically important advantage over manual dynamic irrigation (MDI) exceeding the 1.0-point minimal clinically important difference, while also outperforming positive pressure and ultrasonic irrigation with smaller, statistically but not clinically important effects. Multisonic and negative-pressure irrigation also ranked favourably, whereas MDI consistently showed the highest pain scores and the lowest SUCRA values. Baseline symptomatic status was a strong effect modifier, with symptomatic teeth experiencing substantially higher pain irrespective of technique. Overall CINeMA confidence was low to very low for most contrasts, indicating that these findings should be interpreted cautiously and highlighting the need for larger, better-designed trials with standardised pain-assessment protocols.
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.