Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

28 questions · 38 findings · 3 reviews · All outcomes

No studies found 8 · 21.1%GRADE not reported 24 · 63.2%Very low 3 · 7.9%Low 3 · 7.9%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Low‐level laser therapy vs Placebo (sham) laser therapy

Patient-reported altered sensation (spontaneous or evoked: anaesthesia/paraesthesia/dysaesthesia/hyperalgesia/allodynia) · Patients of any age in any setting requiring intervention for iatrogenic injury to the inferior alveolar or lingual nerve

It is very uncertain whether low-level laser therapy (photon-plus GaAlAs diode laser; 70 mW… changes patient-reported altered sensation (spontaneous or evoked:… compared with placebo (sham) laser therapy (very low certainty).

2 findings from 1 review

Low‐level laser therapy vs Placebo (sham) laser therapy

Somatosensory evoked potentials · Patients of any age in any setting requiring intervention for iatrogenic injury to the inferior alveolar or lingual nerve

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Low‐level laser therapy vs Placebo (sham) laser therapy

Mechanosensory perception (load in grams to elicit sensation; Semmes Weinstein monofilaments) · Patients of any age in any setting requiring intervention for iatrogenic injury to the inferior alveolar or lingual nerve

Low-level laser therapy (photon-plus GaAlAs diode laser; 70 mW… led to higher mechanosensory perception (load in grams to elicit sensation; Semmes… compared with placebo (sham) laser therapy; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review