Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

33 questions · 43 findings · 4 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 9 · 20.9%GRADE not reported 22 · 51.2%Very low 8 · 18.6%Low 3 · 7%Moderate 1 · 2.3%High 0 · 0%

Diode laser vs argon laser

Pain during laser treatment ‐ not reported · proliferative diabetic retinopathy

Diode laser probably leads to higher pain during laser treatment compared with argon laser (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Different lasers and techniques for proliferative diabetic retinopathy 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 3.07 [2.15, 4.39]
4 studies · 228 participants
Moderate

Diode laser vs argon laser

Progression of PDR · proliferative diabetic retinopathy

It is very uncertain whether diode laser changes progression of PDR compared with argon laser (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Different lasers and techniques for proliferative diabetic retinopathy 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.9 [0.41, 2]
1 study · 66 participants
Very low

Diode laser vs argon laser

Regression of PDR · proliferative diabetic retinopathy

It is very uncertain whether diode laser changes regression of PDR compared with argon laser (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Different lasers and techniques for proliferative diabetic retinopathy 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.75 [0.35, 1.6]
1 study · 66 participants
Very low

Diode laser vs argon laser

Vision‐related QoL ‐ not reported · proliferative diabetic retinopathy

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Different lasers and techniques for proliferative diabetic retinopathy 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Diode laser vs argon laser

Adverse events · proliferative diabetic retinopathy

It is very uncertain whether diode laser changes adverse events compared with argon laser (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Different lasers and techniques for proliferative diabetic retinopathy 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.5 [0.05, 4.86]
2 studies · 134 participants
Very low

Diode laser vs argon laser

BCVA: loss of 15 or more ETDRS letters · proliferative diabetic retinopathy

It is very uncertain whether diode laser changes BCVA: loss of 15 or more ETDRS letters compared with argon laser (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Different lasers and techniques for proliferative diabetic retinopathy 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.95 [0.66, 1.36]
2 studies · 134 participants
Very low

Diode laser vs argon laser

BCVA: gain of 15 or more ETDRS letters · proliferative diabetic retinopathy

It is very uncertain whether diode laser changes BCVA: gain of 15 or more ETDRS letters compared with argon laser (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Different lasers and techniques for proliferative diabetic retinopathy 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.6 [0.25, 1.45]
2 studies · 134 participants
Very low

Diode laser vs electrosurgery

Clinical failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth

It is very uncertain whether diode laser changes clinical failure compared with electrosurgery (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
6 months
RR 0.20 [0.01, 3.70]
2 studies · 50 participants
Very low

Diode laser vs Ferric sulphate (FS)

Radiological failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth

Diode laser showed no clear difference in radiological failure compared with ferric sulphate (FS) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
6 months
RR 0.89 [0.38, 2.12]
3 studies · 130 participants
Low

Diode laser vs Ferric sulphate (FS)

Clinical failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth

Diode laser showed no clear difference in clinical failure compared with ferric sulphate (FS) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
6 months
RR 0.23 [0.04, 1.30]
3 studies · 130 participants
Low

Diode laser vs Formocresol (FC)

Radiological failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth

Diode laser showed no clear difference in radiological failure compared with formocresol (FC); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
12 months
RR 2.00 [0.75, 5.33]
1 study · 80 participants
GRADE not reported

Diode laser vs Formocresol (FC)

Clinical failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth

Diode laser showed no clear difference in clinical failure compared with formocresol (FC); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
12 months
RR 0.33 [0.01, 7.95]
1 study · 80 participants
GRADE not reported

Diode laser vs electrosurgery

Radiological failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth

Diode laser showed no clear difference in radiological failure compared with electrosurgery (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
6 months
RR 0.64 [0.19, 2.18]
2 studies · 50 participants
Low

Diode laser, visible red (630 nm to 700 nm) vs Placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment

Changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through tactile stimuli · Patients aged above 12 years with self-reported tooth hypersensitivity confirmed on clinical evaluation

Diode laser, visible red (630 nm to 700 nm) led to lower changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through tactile… compared with placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment; GRADE not reported.

3 findings from 1 review

Laser therapy for dentinal hypersensitivity 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
Medium term (24 hours to 2 months)
MD -2.95 [-5.14, -0.75]
4 studies
GRADE not reported
Laser therapy for dentinal hypersensitivity 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
Long term (more than 2 months)
MD -4.67 [-5.38, -3.96]
2 studies
GRADE not reported
Laser therapy for dentinal hypersensitivity 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
Short term (0 to 24 hours)
MD -0.81 [-1.16, -0.45]
4 studies
GRADE not reported

Diode laser, visible red (630 nm to 700 nm) vs Placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment

Changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through air blast stimuli · Patients aged above 12 years with self-reported tooth hypersensitivity confirmed on clinical evaluation

Diode laser, visible red (630 nm to 700 nm) led to lower changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through air blast… compared with placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment; GRADE not reported.

3 findings from 1 review

Laser therapy for dentinal hypersensitivity 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
Short term (0 to 24 hours)
MD -1.95 [-3.14, -0.76]
4 studies
GRADE not reported
Laser therapy for dentinal hypersensitivity 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
Long term (more than 2 months)
MD 0.81 [-0.78, 2.40]
1 study
GRADE not reported
Laser therapy for dentinal hypersensitivity 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
Medium term (24 hours to 2 months)
MD -1.45 [-4.35, 1.44]
4 studies
GRADE not reported

Diode laser, near infrared (700 nm to 850 nm) vs Placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment

Changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through air blast stimuli · Patients aged above 12 years with self-reported tooth hypersensitivity confirmed on clinical evaluation

Diode laser, near infrared (700 nm to 850 nm) led to lower changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through air blast… compared with placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment; GRADE not reported.

3 findings from 1 review

Laser therapy for dentinal hypersensitivity 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
Medium term (24 hours to 2 months)
MD -3.22 [-4.88, -1.56]
4 studies
GRADE not reported
Laser therapy for dentinal hypersensitivity 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
Short term (0 to 24 hours)
MD -2.62 [-5.61, 0.38]
4 studies
GRADE not reported
Laser therapy for dentinal hypersensitivity 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
Long term (more than 2 months)
MD -3.83 [-6.90, -0.77]
2 studies
GRADE not reported

Diode laser, near infrared (850 nm to 980 nm) vs Placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment

Changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through air blast stimuli · Patients aged above 12 years with self-reported tooth hypersensitivity confirmed on clinical evaluation

Diode laser, near infrared (850 nm to 980 nm) led to lower changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through air blast… compared with placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment; GRADE not reported.

2 findings from 1 review

Laser therapy for dentinal hypersensitivity 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
Short term (0 to 24 hours)
MD -1.90 [-2.49, -1.31]
1 study
GRADE not reported
Laser therapy for dentinal hypersensitivity 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
Medium term (24 hours to 2 months)
MD -2.30 [-2.86, -1.74]
1 study
GRADE not reported

Diode laser, near infrared (850 nm to 980 nm) vs Placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment

Changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through tactile stimuli · Patients aged above 12 years with self-reported tooth hypersensitivity confirmed on clinical evaluation

Diode laser, near infrared (850 nm to 980 nm) led to lower changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through tactile… compared with placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment; GRADE not reported.

2 findings from 1 review

Laser therapy for dentinal hypersensitivity 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
Medium term (24 hours to 2 months)
MD -1.83 [-2.36, -1.30]
1 study
GRADE not reported
Laser therapy for dentinal hypersensitivity 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
Short term (0 to 24 hours)
MD -2.17 [-2.80, -1.54]
1 study
GRADE not reported

Diode laser, near infrared (700 nm to 850 nm) vs Placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment

Changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through tactile stimuli · Patients aged above 12 years with self-reported tooth hypersensitivity confirmed on clinical evaluation

Diode laser, near infrared (700 nm to 850 nm) showed no clear difference in changes in intensity of pain (VAS 0 to 10) tested through tactile… compared with placebo (placebo laser or placebo agent) or no treatment; GRADE not reported.

2 findings from 1 review

Laser therapy for dentinal hypersensitivity 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
Medium term (24 hours to 2 months)
MD -0.68 [-3.57, 2.21]
2 studies
GRADE not reported
Laser therapy for dentinal hypersensitivity 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
Short term (0 to 24 hours)
MD 0.27 [-0.60, 1.14]
2 studies
GRADE not reported

Low-level diode laser vs Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA)

Overall failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth

Low-level diode laser showed no clear difference in overall failure compared with mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Pulp treatment for extensive decay in primary teeth 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
12 months
RR 4.00 [0.49, 32.72]
1 study · 40 participants
GRADE not reported