Low-level laser therapy for treatment of neurosensory disorders after orthognathic surgery: A systematic review of randomized clinical trials
Bittencourt MA, Paranhos LR, Martins-Filho PR
Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal · 18 citas
Etiquetas de revisión
Financiación no declaradaDatos neutrales que nuestra revisión registró sobre cómo se hizo este estudio. Describen el método, nunca si nos gusta el resultado.
Cómo se estudió
- Diseño
- Revisión sistemática (indexado por PubMed)
- Estudiado en
- Personas
- Resultado principal
- Marcadores de salud y funcionamiento
Quién lo pagó
- Financiación
- Financiación no declarada
Publicación
- Publicado
- 2017-01-01 · Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal · vol. 22 · número 6 · pág. 0
- Editorial
- Medicina Oral S.L.
- Citado
- 39 citas · más que el 57% de estudios similares · 0.6× el promedio de su campo
- Referencias
- 31 trabajos
- Acceso
- Acceso abierto (publicación gratuita)
- Áreas de investigación
- Laser Applications in Dentistry and Medicine · Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics · Temporomandibular Joint Disorders
- Palabras clave
- low-level laser therapy, orthognathic surgery, postoperative pain, paresthesia, neurosensory recovery, two-point discrimination, sensory recovery, oral surgery complications
- MeSH
- humans, paresthesia, postoperative complications, randomized controlled trials as topic, orthognathic surgical procedures, low-level light therapy, postoperative pain
3 autores
- MAV Bittencourt🇧🇷Universidade Federal da Bahia; Universidade Federal de Sergipe
- Luiz Renato Paranhos🇧🇷Universidade Federal de Sergipe
- Paulo Ricardo Martins‐Filho🇧🇷Universidade Federal de Sergipe
Resumen
El texto original del estudio, en el idioma en que se publicó.
Background
Low-level laser has been widely used in Dentistry and many studies have focused on its application in oral surgeries. This study was conducted with the aim of searching for scientific evidence concerning the effectiveness of laser to reduce pain or paresthesia related to orthognathic surgery.
Material and methods
An electronic search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, Science Direct, LILACS, SciELO, CENTRAL, Google Scholar, OpenGrey, and ClinicalTrials.gov, up to November 2016, with no restrictions on language or year of publication. Additionally, a hand search of the reference list of the selected studies was carried out. The PICOS strategy was used to define the eligibility criteria and only randomized clinical trials were selected.
Results
Out of 1,257 identified citations, three papers fulfilled the criteria and were included in the systematic review. The risk of bias was assessed according to the Cochrane Guidelines for Clinical Trials and results were exposed based on a descriptive analysis. One study showed that laser therapy was effective to reduce postoperative pain 24 hours (P=0.007) and 72 hours (P=0.007) after surgery. Other study revealed the positive effect of laser to improve neurosensory recovery 60 days after surgery, evaluated also by the two-point discrimination (P=0.005) and sensory (P=0.008) tests. The third study reported an improvement for general sensibility of 68.75% for laser group, compared with 21.43% for placebo (P=0.0095), six months after surgery.
Conclusions
Individual studies suggested a positive effect of low-level laser therapy on reduction of postoperative pain and acceleration of improvement of paresthesia related to orthognathic surgery. However, due to the insufficient number and heterogeneity of studies, a meta-analysis evaluating the outcomes of interest was not performed, and a pragmatic recommendation about the use of laser therapy is not possible. This systematic review was conducted according to the statements of PRISMA and was registered at PROSPERO under the number CRD42016043258.
Resumen vía Europe PMC. Los derechos de autor siguen siendo de los autores o la editorial (CC BY).
Confianza de la comunidad
Cargando…
¿Cuánto confías en los hallazgos de este estudio?
Comentarios
¿Algo está mal aquí?
Señala este estudio si su información, etiquetas o financiación parecen incorrectas. Un editor revisa cada señalamiento.
Información educativa sobre investigación publicada. No es consejo médico ni una recomendación para empezar o dejar nada.