Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

1,104 questions · 1,200 findings · 23 reviews · Oral medicine and oral cancer

No studies found 143 · 11.9%GRADE not reported 760 · 63.3%Very low 201 · 16.8%Low 66 · 5.5%Moderate 29 · 2.4%High 1 · 0.1%

Aciclovir (oral or intravenous) for treatment vs placebo

Amount of analgesia · Patients being treated for cancer with established oral HSV infection (bone marrow transplant recipients / immunocompromised)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Prophylactic valaciclovir (lower dose) vs Prophylactic valaciclovir (higher dose)

Viral isolates · Patients being treated for cancer (acute leukaemia; chemotherapy or stem-cell transplantation)
1 finding from 1 review

Prophylactic aciclovir (oral or intravenous) vs Prophylactic valaciclovir (oral)

Presence/absence of HSV oral lesions · Patients being treated for cancer (predominantly haematological malignancies)

Prophylactic aciclovir (oral or intravenous) showed no clear difference in presence/absence of HSV oral lesions compared with prophylactic valaciclovir (oral); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Prophylactic aciclovir (oral or intravenous) vs placebo

Presence/absence of HSV oral lesions · Patients being treated for cancer (predominantly haematological malignancies)

Prophylactic aciclovir (oral or intravenous) led to lower presence/absence of HSV oral lesions compared with placebo; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Prophylactic aciclovir (oral or intravenous) vs placebo

Length of hospital stay · Patients being treated for cancer (predominantly haematological malignancies)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Aciclovir (oral or intravenous) for treatment vs placebo

Patient quality of life · Patients being treated for cancer with established oral HSV infection (bone marrow transplant recipients / immunocompromised)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Prophylactic aciclovir (oral or intravenous) vs placebo

Recurrence of lesions · Patients being treated for cancer (predominantly haematological malignancies)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Prophylactic valaciclovir (lower dose) vs Prophylactic valaciclovir (higher dose)

Adverse effects · Patients being treated for cancer (acute leukaemia; chemotherapy or stem-cell transplantation)
1 finding from 1 review

Prophylactic aciclovir (oral or intravenous) vs Prophylactic valaciclovir (oral)

Cost of oral care · Patients being treated for cancer (predominantly haematological malignancies)
1 finding from 1 review

Aciclovir (oral or intravenous) for treatment vs placebo

Adverse effects · Patients being treated for cancer with established oral HSV infection (bone marrow transplant recipients / immunocompromised)
1 finding from 1 review

Aciclovir (oral or intravenous) for treatment vs placebo

Cost of oral care · Patients being treated for cancer with established oral HSV infection (bone marrow transplant recipients / immunocompromised)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Prophylactic aciclovir (oral or intravenous) vs placebo

Adverse effects · Patients being treated for cancer (predominantly haematological malignancies)
1 finding from 1 review

Minimal incision palatopharyngoplasty (MIPP) vs MIPP with additional individualised velopharyngeal surgery (pharyngeal flap or sphincter pharyngoplasty)

Quality of life (validated questionnaire) · Children or adolescents aged 3 years or older with velopharyngeal insufficiency (VPI) associated with non-syndromic submucous cleft palate

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Minimal incision palatopharyngoplasty (MIPP) vs MIPP with additional individualised velopharyngeal surgery (pharyngeal flap or sphincter pharyngoplasty)

Instrumental assessment: nasalance score (nasometry and pressure-flow measure) · Children or adolescents aged 3 years or older with velopharyngeal insufficiency (VPI) associated with non-syndromic submucous cleft palate

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Minimal incision palatopharyngoplasty (MIPP) vs MIPP with additional individualised velopharyngeal surgery (pharyngeal flap or sphincter pharyngoplasty)

Self-esteem (Piers-Harris self-concept scale) · Children or adolescents aged 3 years or older with velopharyngeal insufficiency (VPI) associated with non-syndromic submucous cleft palate

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Minimal incision palatopharyngoplasty (MIPP) vs MIPP with additional individualised velopharyngeal surgery (pharyngeal flap or sphincter pharyngoplasty)

Instrumental assessment: velopharyngeal complete closure and gap size (videonasopharyngoscopy and multiview videofluoroscopy) · Children or adolescents aged 3 years or older with velopharyngeal insufficiency (VPI) associated with non-syndromic submucous cleft palate
1 finding from 1 review
  • Interventions for the management of submucous cleft palate 2008 · Cochrane All outcomes
    3 months post-operatively
    Complete closure occurred in 32 (86%) of the participants in group 1 (MIPP) and in 31 (89%) in group 2, P > 0.05. After eliminating the nine patients with residual velopharyngeal insufficiency, the post-operative gap…
    1 study · 72 participants
    GRADE not reported

Minimal incision palatopharyngoplasty (MIPP) vs MIPP with additional individualised velopharyngeal surgery (pharyngeal flap or sphincter pharyngoplasty)

Adverse effect: failure of muscle fusion in the region of the cleft after surgery · Children or adolescents aged 3 years or older with velopharyngeal insufficiency (VPI) associated with non-syndromic submucous cleft palate
1 finding from 1 review

Minimal incision palatopharyngoplasty (MIPP) vs MIPP with additional individualised velopharyngeal surgery (pharyngeal flap or sphincter pharyngoplasty)

Adverse effect: unacceptable nasal resonance after repair · Children or adolescents aged 3 years or older with velopharyngeal insufficiency (VPI) associated with non-syndromic submucous cleft palate

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Minimal incision palatopharyngoplasty (MIPP) vs MIPP with additional individualised velopharyngeal surgery (pharyngeal flap or sphincter pharyngoplasty)

Adverse effect: obstructive sleep apnoea or airway compromise · Children or adolescents aged 3 years or older with velopharyngeal insufficiency (VPI) associated with non-syndromic submucous cleft palate
1 finding from 1 review