使用电子顶点定位器与x线摄影方法测定工作长度对术后疼痛的影响:随机对照试验的系统综述。

IF 2.3 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Muhammad Usman Sultan, Muhammad Anas, Aamna Mansur, Jaber Hamad Jaber Amin
{"title":"使用电子顶点定位器与x线摄影方法测定工作长度对术后疼痛的影响:随机对照试验的系统综述。","authors":"Muhammad Usman Sultan, Muhammad Anas, Aamna Mansur, Jaber Hamad Jaber Amin","doi":"10.1007/s44445-026-00158-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>When it comes to root canal therapy, the right working length (WL) must be established in order to minimize material extrusion and the resulting post- procedure pain. Although electronic apex locators (EALs) are a radiation-free, time-saving substitute for conventional or digital radiography techniques, but their impact on postoperative pain has been controversial. This systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251247626) and adhered to PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing EAL versus radiographic WL determination, with postoperative pain as an outcome, were searched in PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ScienceDirect from January 2000 to November 17, 2025. Only peer-reviewed RCTs involving permanent teeth were considered. Bias risk was evaluated using Cochrane RoB 2.0. Four RCTs (total n = 414 patients) met the inclusion criteria. Four RCTs (2014-2024) showed no statistically significant difference in postoperative pain incidence, intensity (measured by VAS or 4-point verbal rating scale), analgesic consumption, or time to pain resolution between EAL and radiographic groups at any time point (4 h to 7 days). Pain levels were generally low to moderate and resolved within 72 h in both groups. One three-arm trial demonstrated significantly lower early pain (6-48 h) with a simultaneous/hybrid EAL plus radiographic technique compared with either method alone. No flare-ups or serious adverse events were reported. Based on limited evidence from four RCTs with methodological concerns (including risks in randomization, blinding, and subjective pain assessment) and very low certainty, electronic apex locators and radiographic methods may yield similar postoperative pain outcomes in single-visit root canal treatment of vital teeth. A combined method of both techniques showed preliminary indications of early pain alleviation in one small trial on symptomatic conditions, but this requires confirmation. EALs may represent a radiation free alternative or supplement to radiography that does not appear to increase pain, though the evidence is insufficient to draw firm conclusions.</p>","PeriodicalId":47246,"journal":{"name":"Saudi Dental Journal","volume":"38 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effect of working length determination on postoperative pain using Electronic Apex Locator versus Radiographic method: a systematic review of randomized control trials.\",\"authors\":\"Muhammad Usman Sultan, Muhammad Anas, Aamna Mansur, Jaber Hamad Jaber Amin\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s44445-026-00158-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>When it comes to root canal therapy, the right working length (WL) must be established in order to minimize material extrusion and the resulting post- procedure pain. Although electronic apex locators (EALs) are a radiation-free, time-saving substitute for conventional or digital radiography techniques, but their impact on postoperative pain has been controversial. This systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251247626) and adhered to PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing EAL versus radiographic WL determination, with postoperative pain as an outcome, were searched in PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ScienceDirect from January 2000 to November 17, 2025. Only peer-reviewed RCTs involving permanent teeth were considered. Bias risk was evaluated using Cochrane RoB 2.0. Four RCTs (total n = 414 patients) met the inclusion criteria. Four RCTs (2014-2024) showed no statistically significant difference in postoperative pain incidence, intensity (measured by VAS or 4-point verbal rating scale), analgesic consumption, or time to pain resolution between EAL and radiographic groups at any time point (4 h to 7 days). Pain levels were generally low to moderate and resolved within 72 h in both groups. One three-arm trial demonstrated significantly lower early pain (6-48 h) with a simultaneous/hybrid EAL plus radiographic technique compared with either method alone. No flare-ups or serious adverse events were reported. Based on limited evidence from four RCTs with methodological concerns (including risks in randomization, blinding, and subjective pain assessment) and very low certainty, electronic apex locators and radiographic methods may yield similar postoperative pain outcomes in single-visit root canal treatment of vital teeth. A combined method of both techniques showed preliminary indications of early pain alleviation in one small trial on symptomatic conditions, but this requires confirmation. EALs may represent a radiation free alternative or supplement to radiography that does not appear to increase pain, though the evidence is insufficient to draw firm conclusions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47246,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Saudi Dental Journal\",\"volume\":\"38 5\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2026-05-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Saudi Dental Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s44445-026-00158-8\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Saudi Dental Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s44445-026-00158-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

当涉及到根管治疗,必须建立正确的工作长度(WL),以尽量减少材料挤压和由此产生的术后疼痛。虽然电子顶点定位器(EALs)是一种无辐射、节省时间的传统或数字放射技术的替代品,但其对术后疼痛的影响一直存在争议。该系统评价已在PROSPERO注册(CRD420251247626),并遵守PRISMA 2020指南。从2000年1月到2025年11月17日,在PubMed、Cochrane CENTRAL和ScienceDirect中检索了以术后疼痛为结果的EAL和x线WL测定的随机对照试验(rct)。只考虑了同行评审的涉及恒牙的随机对照试验。偏倚风险评价采用Cochrane RoB 2.0。4个rct(共n = 414例患者)符合纳入标准。4项随机对照试验(2014-2024)显示,在任何时间点(4小时至7天),EAL组和x线组在术后疼痛发生率、强度(以VAS或4点口头评定量表测量)、镇痛药物消耗或疼痛缓解时间方面均无统计学差异。两组患者疼痛程度均为低至中度,均在72 h内缓解。一项三臂试验表明,与单独使用任何一种方法相比,同时/混合EAL加x线摄影技术显著降低了早期疼痛(6-48小时)。没有突发或严重不良事件的报道。基于四项随机对照试验的有限证据(包括方法学问题,包括随机化、盲法和主观疼痛评估的风险)和非常低的确定性,电子尖端定位器和放射学方法在单次访问重要牙齿根管治疗中可能产生相似的术后疼痛结果。两种技术的联合方法在一项针对症状性疾病的小型试验中显示出早期疼痛缓解的初步迹象,但这需要证实。EALs可能是放射照相的一种无辐射替代或补充,似乎不会增加疼痛,尽管证据不足,无法得出确切的结论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effect of working length determination on postoperative pain using Electronic Apex Locator versus Radiographic method: a systematic review of randomized control trials.

When it comes to root canal therapy, the right working length (WL) must be established in order to minimize material extrusion and the resulting post- procedure pain. Although electronic apex locators (EALs) are a radiation-free, time-saving substitute for conventional or digital radiography techniques, but their impact on postoperative pain has been controversial. This systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251247626) and adhered to PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing EAL versus radiographic WL determination, with postoperative pain as an outcome, were searched in PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ScienceDirect from January 2000 to November 17, 2025. Only peer-reviewed RCTs involving permanent teeth were considered. Bias risk was evaluated using Cochrane RoB 2.0. Four RCTs (total n = 414 patients) met the inclusion criteria. Four RCTs (2014-2024) showed no statistically significant difference in postoperative pain incidence, intensity (measured by VAS or 4-point verbal rating scale), analgesic consumption, or time to pain resolution between EAL and radiographic groups at any time point (4 h to 7 days). Pain levels were generally low to moderate and resolved within 72 h in both groups. One three-arm trial demonstrated significantly lower early pain (6-48 h) with a simultaneous/hybrid EAL plus radiographic technique compared with either method alone. No flare-ups or serious adverse events were reported. Based on limited evidence from four RCTs with methodological concerns (including risks in randomization, blinding, and subjective pain assessment) and very low certainty, electronic apex locators and radiographic methods may yield similar postoperative pain outcomes in single-visit root canal treatment of vital teeth. A combined method of both techniques showed preliminary indications of early pain alleviation in one small trial on symptomatic conditions, but this requires confirmation. EALs may represent a radiation free alternative or supplement to radiography that does not appear to increase pain, though the evidence is insufficient to draw firm conclusions.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Saudi Dental Journal
Saudi Dental Journal DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
86
审稿时长
22 weeks
期刊介绍: Saudi Dental Journal is an English language, peer-reviewed scholarly publication in the area of dentistry. Saudi Dental Journal publishes original research and reviews on, but not limited to: • dental disease • clinical trials • dental equipment • new and experimental techniques • epidemiology and oral health • restorative dentistry • periodontology • endodontology • prosthodontics • paediatric dentistry • orthodontics and dental education Saudi Dental Journal is the official publication of the Saudi Dental Society and is published by King Saud University in collaboration with Elsevier and is edited by an international group of eminent researchers.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书