| Literature DB >> 34831517 |
Amal Almohaimede1, Ebtissam Al-Madi1.
Abstract
This research aimed to assess the potency of intracanal cold therapy in diminishing postoperative endodontic pain. PubMed, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, the Web of Science, grey literature, and endodontic journals were used to identify randomized controlled clinical trials evaluating postoperative pain after a final irrigation with a cold irrigant (as an experimental group) and a room temperature irrigant (as a control group). The risk of bias was rated according to the Cochrane Collaboration's tool and the Grading Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system was used to estimate the evidence quality. For the meta-analysis, a random effects model was utilized. The qualitative analysis contained 16 studies and the quantitative analysis contained 9 studies. The experimental groups showed a reduction in postoperative pain at 6 h (mean difference (MD) = -1.11; p = 0.0004; I2 = 72%; low quality evidence), 24 h (MD = -1.08; p = 0.003; I2 = 92%; low quality evidence), 48 h (MD = -0.38; p = 0.04; I2 = 81%; low quality evidence), and 72 h (MD = -0.69; p = 0.04; I2 = 90%; low quality evidence). A higher quality of evidence from more clinical trials is needed.Entities:
Keywords: cold therapy; cryotherapy; endodontic pain; intracanal cryotherapy
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34831517 PMCID: PMC8621421 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph182211750
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1PRISMA 2020 flow diagram for the systematic reviews and meta-analysis.
Summary of the main characteristics of the included studies.
| Author and Year | Sample Size | Age | Pulpal and Periapical Diagnosis | Type of Teeth | Pain Assessment Tool | Mean and SD of Preoperative Pain in the Cryotherapy Group | Mean and SD of Preoperative Pain in the Control Group | Final Irrigation in the Cryotherapy Group | Final Irrigation in the Control Group | Pain Assessment Times | Treat ment Visits | Conclusion |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nahlawi et al., 2016 R [ | 75 | 20–46 | Irreversible pulpitis | Single-rooted single canal teeth | VAS | 2.0 ± 0.9 | 2.5 ± 0.78 | 20 mL of 2–4 °C saline for 5 min with needle syringe + EndoVac negative irrigation | 20 mL room temperature saline for 5 min with needle syringe + EndoVac negative irrigation | 6, 12, 24, 48 h, and 7 days | Single visit | Intracanal cryotherapy eliminated postendodontic pain significantly compared with the control group at 6, 12, 24, and 48 h postoperatively but no significant difference after 1 week |
| Keskin et al., 2017 R [ | 170 | 19–63 | Irreversible pulpitis with normal apical tissues or symptomatic apical periodontitis | Maxillary or mandibular incisors/premolars/molars | VAS | 2.3 ± 0.8 | 2.0 ± 0.6 | 5 mL of 2.5 °C saline for 5 min + needle syringe | 5 mL room temperature saline for 5 min + needle syringe | 24 and 48 h | Single visit | Cryotherapy reduced postoperative pain significantly after 24 h compared with the control group but no significant difference after 48 h |
| Jain et al., 2018 [ | 60 | 18–25 | Symptomatic irreversible pulpitis with normal apical tissues or apical periodontitis | Mandibular 1st molars | VAS | 8.12 ± 0.67 | 8.52 ± 0.75 | 2.5 °C saline for 1 min + needle syringe | Room temperature saline for 1 min + needle syringe | 6, 24, and 48 h | Multi | Intracanal cryotherapy was effective in significantly reducing pain during and after endodontic treatment compared with the control group in symptomatic irreversible pulpitis with symptomatic apical periodontitis at 6, 24, and 48 h |
| Gundogdu and Arslan, 2018 R [ | 84 | ≥18 | Symptomatic irreversible pulpitis with symptomatic apical periodontitis | Maxillary or mandibular molars | VAS | 91.32 ± 8.214 | 94.86 ± 4.293 | 20 mL of 2.5 °C saline for 5 min + needle syringe | 20 mL room temperature saline for 5 min + needle syringe | 24, 72 h, 5, and 7 days | Single visit | Intracanal cryotherapy reduced postoperative pain levels and reduced the VAS scores of pain on percussion compared with the levels in the control group after 24 h, 3, 5, and 7 days |
| Bazaid and Kenawi, 2018 [ | 36 | 18–40 | Irreversible pulpitis with normal apical tissues or apical periodontitis | Molars and premolars | VAS | NR | NR | 2.5 °C saline for 2 min + side-vented needle | Room temperature saline for 2 min + side-vented needle | 24 and 48 h | Multi | Using cold normal saline reduced the postoperative pain degree in patients with irreversible pulpitis with apical periodontitis but it did not affect patients with irreversible pulpitis without apical periodontitis after 24 and 48 h postoperatively |
| Vera et al., 2018 R [ | 210 | 18–60 | Necrotic pulp with symptomatic apical periodontitis | Single canal teeth | VAS | 8.847 ± 0.769 | 8.96 ± 0.789 | 20 mL of 2.5 °C saline for 5 min | 20 mL room temperature saline for 5 min | 6, 24, and 72 h | Multi | Intracanal cryotherapy reduced the incidence of postoperative pain and the need for medication in patients with necrotic pulp and symptomatic apical periodontitis after 6, 24, and 72 h compared with the control group |
| Nandhini, 2018 [ | 40 | 20–50 | Symptomatic irreversible pulpitis with normal apical tissues or apical periodontitis | Mandibular premolars | Heft–Parker scale | 80.35 ± 52.652 | 85.2 ± 47.32 | Cold saline at 2.5 °C + EndoVac microcannula | Saline at room temperature + EndoVac microcannula | 6, 12, 24, 48 h, 4, and 7 days | Single visit | Comparison of the control and experimental group values showed significant differences at 6, 12, 24, 48 h, and 4 days and without any significant difference at the end of the 7th day. Use of normal saline as an irrigant reduced the pain intensity slowly whereas the use of cold saline totally abolished pain by the end of the 4th day |
| Alharthi et al., 2019 R [ | 105 | 18–50 | Asymptomatic irreversible pulpitis with normal apical tissues | Single canal teeth | VAS | 0 ± 0 | 0 ± 0 | 10 mL of cold (1.5–2.5 °C) saline for 5 min + side-vented needle | 10 mL room temperature saline for 5 min + side-vented needle | 6, 24, and 48 h | Single visit | Room temperature saline showed comparable results to intracanal cryotherapy in pain reduction at 6, 24, and 48 h postoperatively |
| Sudheer et al., 2019 [ | 60 | 18–45 | Symptomatic irreversible pulpitis | Single-rooted teeth | VAS | NR | NR | 10 mL of 2.5 °C saline | 10 mL room temperature saline | 6, 24, and 48 h | Single visit | Intracanal cryotherapy significantly reduced postoperative pain compared with the control group at 6, 24, and 48 h postoperatively |
| Vieyra et al., 2019 R [ | 240 | 18–65 | Vital pulp | Maxillary or mandibular molars, premolar, anteriors | VAS | 0 ± 0 | 0 ± 0 | 10 mL of cold (4 °C + 2.5 °C) saline with cold (4 °C + 2.5 °C) EndoVac microcannula for 1 min | 10 mL room temperature saline + EndoVac microcannula for 1 min | 24, 48, and 72 h | Single visit | No statistically significant difference between the cold and room temperature saline was found regarding the degree or duration of pain at 24, 48, and 72 h postoperatively |
| Al-Abdullah et al., 2020 [ | 60 | >20 | Irreversible pulpitis | Single-rooted with single canal teeth | VAS | NR | NR | 20 mL of 2–4 °C cold saline for 5 min + needle syringe | 20 mL room temperature saline for 5 min + needle syringe | 6, 12, 24, 48 h, and 7 days | Single visit | Intracanal cryotherapy eliminated postendodontic pain compared with the control group at 6, 12, 24, and 48 h but the difference was not significant after 7 days |
| Nandakumar and Nasim, 2020 [ | 64 | 18–70 | Symptomatic irreversible pulpitis with apical periodontitis | Molars and premolars | VAS | 4.72 ± 1.373 | 4.66 ± 1.096 | 20 mL of 2–4 °C NaOCl for 5 min + needle syringe | 20 mL room temperature NaOCl for 5 min + needle syringe | 6, 24, and 48 h | Single visit | Intracanal cryotherapy significantly reduced analgesic consumption and postoperative pain at 6, 24, and 48 h compared with the control group |
| Jaiswal et al., 2020 [ | 30 | NR | Necrotic pulp with symptomatic apical periodontitis | NR | VAS | NR | NR | 20 mL of 2.5 °C saline for 5 min + needle syringe | 20 mL room temperature saline for 5 min + needle syringe | 6 and 24 h | Multi | No statistically significant difference between the cold and room temperature saline in reducing postoperative pain and analgesic consumption at 6 and 24 h |
| Akpinar and Kaya, 2021 R [ | 94 | 18–65 | Irreversible pulpitis with symptomatic apical periodontitis | Mandibular molars | VAS | NR | NR | 20 mL of 2.5 °C saline for 5 min + 30 gauge side-hole special irrigation tip | 5 mL of distilled water + 30 gauge side-hole special irrigation tip | 4, 8, 12, 24, 48, and 72 h | Multi | Intracanal cryotherapy significantly reduced postoperative pain compared with the control group at 4, 8, 12, 24, 48, and 72 h |
| Emad et al., 2021 [ | 48 | 20–50 | Symptomatic apical periodontitis | Single-rooted teeth | VAS | NR | NR | 20 mL of 5% 2.5 °C NaOCl for 5 min + side-vented (30G) needle | 20 mL of 5% room temperature NaOCl for 5 min + side-vented (30G) needle | 12, 24, 48, 72 h, and 7 days | Multi | The cryotherapy irrigation protocol showed lower levels of postoperative pain compared with the control group at 12, 24, 48, 72 h, and 7 days |
| Karataş et al., 2021 R [ | 45 | Mean = 27 | Necrotic pulp with asymptomatic apical periodontitis | Incisors, canines, premolars | VAS | NR | NR | 5 mL of 1% 2 °C NaOCl for 1 min + syringe | 5 mL of 1% 25 °C NaOCl for 1 min + syringe | 24, 48, 72 h, 5, and 7 days | NR | No statistically significant difference between the cold and room temperature NaOCl in postoperative pain reduction and in postoperative analgesic intake |
R Registered in PubMed. VAS: Visual analogue scale; NR: Not recorded.
Figure 2Summary of the risk assessment bias (RoB 2) of the included randomized controlled trials.
Figure 3Forest plot comparing postoperative pain between the experimental group (intracanal cryotherapy) and the control group (room temperature) at 6 h. IV: Intravitreal.
Certainty of evidence. Question: Is intracanal cryotherapy effective in reducing postoperative endodontic pain compared with a room temperature irrigant (Control)?; Setting: A dental clinic; Participants: Adult patients (≥18 years old) with permanent teeth that have pulpal or periradicular pathosis; Intervention: Final irrigation with a cold irrigant; Comparator: Final irrigation with an irrigant at room temperature.
| Certainty Assessment | Number of Patients | Effect | Certainty § | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of Studies | Study Design | Risk of Bias | Inconsistency | Indirectness | Imprecision | Other Considerations | Intracanal Cryotherapy | Room Temperature Irrigant (Control) | Mean Difference | |
|
| ||||||||||
| 6 | Randomized clinical trials | Serious a | Serious b | Not serious c | Not serious d | None | 225 | 225 | −1.11 (−1.72 to −0.5) | ⨁⨁◯◯ |
|
| ||||||||||
| 9 | Randomized clinical trials | Serious a | Serious b | Not serious c | Not serious d | None | 422 | 341 | −1.08 (−1.79 to −0.38) | ⨁⨁◯◯ |
|
| ||||||||||
| 5 | Randomized clinical trials | Serious a | Serious b | Not serious c | Not serious d | None | 260 | 180 | −0.38 (−0.73 to −0.02) | ⨁⨁◯◯ |
|
| ||||||||||
| 5 | Randomized clinical trials | Serious a | Serious b | Not serious c | Not serious d | None | 290 | 209 | −0.69 (−1.34 to −0.05) | ⨁⨁◯◯ |
* CI: Confidence interval; § GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) certainty ratings: very low certainty: the authors have very little confidence in the effect estimate (the true effect is probably markedly different from the estimated effect); low certainty: the authors have little confidence in the effect estimate (the true effect might be markedly different from the estimated effect); moderate certainty: the authors have moderate confidence in the effect estimate (the authors believe that the true effect is probably close to the estimated effect); high certainty: the authors have a lot of confidence that the true effect is similar to the estimated effect; a concerns of a risk of bias; b substantial heterogeneity; c direct comparison; d narrow confidence interval.
Figure 4Forest plot comparing postoperative pain between the experimental group (intracanal cryotherapy) and the control group (room temperature) at 24 h.
Figure 5Forest plot comparing postoperative pain between the experimental group (intracanal cryotherapy) and the control group (room temperature) at 48 h.
Figure 6Forest plot comparing postoperative pain between the experimental group (intracanal cryotherapy) and the control group (room temperature) at 72 h.