Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

Refine by population, intervention, comparison or outcome
More filters
Evidence found and GRADE certainty

106 questions · 113 findings · 2 reviews · Anaesthesia

No studies found 39 · 34.5%GRADE not reported 16 · 14.2%Very low 31 · 27.4%Low 23 · 20.4%Moderate 4 · 3.5%High 0 · 0%

0.5% bupivacaine, 1:200,000 epinephrine vs 2% lidocaine, 1:100,000 epinephrine

Adverse effects: pain following injection · Participants of any age and gender undergoing dental procedures, and volunteers who took part in simulated scenario studies in which…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

2 findings from 1 review

0.5% bupivacaine, 1:200,000 epinephrine vs 2% lidocaine, 1:100,000 epinephrine

Speed of onset of anaesthesia (soft tissue, simulated) · Participants of any age and gender undergoing dental procedures, and volunteers who took part in simulated scenario studies in which…

It is very uncertain whether 0.5% bupivacaine, 1:200,000 epinephrine changes speed of onset of anaesthesia (soft tissue, simulated) compared with 2% lidocaine, 1:100,000 epinephrine (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

0.5% bupivacaine, 1:200,000 epinephrine vs 2% lidocaine, 1:100,000 epinephrine

Success of local anaesthesia, absence of pain (clinical testing of healthy pulps, hard and soft tissues) · Participants of any age and gender undergoing dental procedures, and volunteers who took part in simulated scenario studies in which…

0.5% bupivacaine, 1:200,000 epinephrine showed no clear difference in success of local anaesthesia, absence of pain (clinical testing of… compared with 2% lidocaine, 1:100,000 epinephrine (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

0.5% bupivacaine, 1:200,000 epinephrine vs 2% lidocaine, 1:100,000 epinephrine

Speed of onset of anaesthesia · Participants of any age and gender undergoing dental procedures, and volunteers who took part in simulated scenario studies in which…
1 finding from 1 review

0.5% bupivacaine, 1:200,000 epinephrine vs 2% lidocaine, 1:100,000 epinephrine

Duration of anaesthesia (soft tissue, simulated) · Participants of any age and gender undergoing dental procedures, and volunteers who took part in simulated scenario studies in which…

It is very uncertain whether 0.5% bupivacaine, 1:200,000 epinephrine changes duration of anaesthesia (soft tissue, simulated) compared with 2% lidocaine, 1:100,000 epinephrine (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

0.5% bupivacaine, 1:200,000 epinephrine vs 2% lidocaine, 1:100,000 epinephrine

Speed of onset of anaesthesia (pulpal, electric pulp tester; healthy pulps) · Participants of any age and gender undergoing dental procedures, and volunteers who took part in simulated scenario studies in which…

0.5% bupivacaine, 1:200,000 epinephrine may leads to higher speed of onset of anaesthesia (pulpal, electric pulp tester; healthy… compared with 2% lidocaine, 1:100,000 epinephrine (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

0.5% bupivacaine, 1:200,000 epinephrine vs 2% lidocaine, 1:100,000 epinephrine

Success of local anaesthesia (pulpal, electric pulp tester; healthy pulps) · Participants of any age and gender undergoing dental procedures, and volunteers who took part in simulated scenario studies in which…

0.5% bupivacaine, 1:200,000 epinephrine showed no clear difference in success of local anaesthesia (pulpal, electric pulp tester; healthy… compared with 2% lidocaine, 1:100,000 epinephrine (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

0.5% bupivacaine, 1:200,000 epinephrine vs 2% lidocaine, 1:100,000 epinephrine

Success of local anaesthesia (soft tissue, self-reported; 100% success in all studies) · Participants of any age and gender undergoing dental procedures, and volunteers who took part in simulated scenario studies in which…
1 finding from 1 review
  • 'Other comparisons with 100% success': IANB - Sampaio 2012 35/35 vs 35/35; Fernandez 2005 39/39 vs 39/39. Both formulations 100% successful; no meta-analysis (no difference).
    2 studies · 74 participants
    GRADE not reported

4% prilocaine, 1:200,000 epinephrine vs 4% prilocaine plain

Duration of anaesthesia (soft tissue, simulated) · Participants of any age and gender undergoing dental procedures, and volunteers who took part in simulated scenario studies in which…

4% prilocaine, 1:200,000 epinephrine may leads to higher duration of anaesthesia (soft tissue, simulated) compared with 4% prilocaine plain (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Cuffed vs uncuffed tubes

Need for epinephrine to treat stridor (defined as the need to use epinephrine to treat postextubation stridor) · Children up to eight years undergoing general anaesthesia

It is very uncertain whether cuffed changes need for epinephrine to treat stridor (defined as the need to use… compared with uncuffed tubes (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

2% mepivacaine, 1:20,000 levonordefrin vs 2% lidocaine, 1:100,000 epinephrine

Duration of anaesthesia (soft tissue, simulated) · Participants of any age and gender undergoing dental procedures, and volunteers who took part in simulated scenario studies in which…

It is very uncertain whether 2% mepivacaine, 1:20,000 levonordefrin changes duration of anaesthesia (soft tissue, simulated) compared with 2% lidocaine, 1:100,000 epinephrine (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

4% prilocaine plain vs 2% lidocaine, 1:100,000 epinephrine

Adverse effects: pain following injection · Participants of any age and gender undergoing dental procedures, and volunteers who took part in simulated scenario studies in which…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

2 findings from 1 review

3% mepivacaine plain vs 2% lidocaine, 1:100,000 epinephrine

Success of local anaesthesia (soft tissue, self-reported; 100% success in all studies) · Participants of any age and gender undergoing dental procedures, and volunteers who took part in simulated scenario studies in which…
1 finding from 1 review
  • '100% success' (lidocaine 1:100,000 vs 3% mepivacaine plain): infraorbital block - Berberich 2009 40/40 vs 40/40; IANB - Cohen 1993 27/27 vs 34/34, McLean 1993 30/30 vs 30/30. Both 100% successful.
    3 studies · 121 participants
    GRADE not reported