Does single-visit root canal treatment of permanent teeth provide more benefit than a multiple-visit approach?

DATA SOURCES: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid. STUDY SELECTION: Randomised controlled trials and quasi-randomised controlled trials were included. POPULATION: Participants aged ≥ 10 with a permanent tooth possessing a completely formed apex and without resorption; Intervention: Root canal treatment (RoCT) carried out in a single visit; Comparison: RoCT carried out over multiple visits; Outcome: Primary outcome was treatment success (retention of tooth or radiographic evidence of healing), with secondary outcomes investigating post-operative symptoms (pain, swelling, sinus tract formation). DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Standard Cochrane methods to assess internal validity were used. The Robins 1 tool (for quasi randomised controlled trials) or risk of bias (RoB) 1 tool (for randomised controlled trials) were used to assess RoB whereby a judgement was assigned as 'low', 'high' or 'unclear'. GRADE (GRADEpro GDT software) was used to assess certainty of evidence for each outcome. The certainty of evidence was defined as high, moderate, low or very low, having no downgrade, downgrade of one level, downgrade of two levels and downgrade of three or more levels, respectively. Of the various subgroups investigated to determine their relevance, only pretreatment conditions (vital teeth versus necrotic teeth) and endodontic technique (manual versus mechanical instrumentation) were available for subgroup analysis. The Cochrane's test for heterogeneity and I2 test were used to assess the variation in treatment effects. A random-effects model was used to combine risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous data and mean difference (MD) for continuous data. Sensitivity analysis was performed for each outcome, excluding studies at overall high or unclear RoB. RESULTS: Forty-seven studies were included in the meta-analysis and internal validity assessment, with 5693 teeth analysed. Ten studies were found to have a low RoB, 17 with a high RoB and 20 with an unclear RoB. No evidence was identified suggesting a difference between treatment carried out in a single visit compared to a multiple visits approach for the primary outcome measure, but there was very low certainty about the findings (RR 0.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.09 to 2.50; I 2 = 0%; 2 studies, 402 teeth). No evidence was identified suggesting a difference between treatment carried out in a single visit compared to multiple visits with regards to radiological failure (RR 0.93, 95% CI: 0.81 to 1.07; I 2 = 0%; 13 studies, 1505 teeth; moderate-certainty evidence), participants reporting pain up to 72 h post obturation (RR 0.97, 95% CI: 0.81 to 1.16; I 2 = 70%; 12 studies, 1329 teeth; low-certainty evidence), pain for 72 h post obturation (MD 0.26, 95% CI: -4.76 to 5.29; I 2 = 98%; 12 studies, 1258 teeth; low-certainty evidence) or pain at 1 week post obturation (RR 1.05, 95% CI: 0.67 to 1.67; I2 = 61%; 9 studies, 1139 teeth; very low-certainty evidence). Similarly, no evidence was identified to prove that there was a difference between treatment carried out in a single visit compared to multiple visits with regards to swelling or flare-up (RR 0.56 95% CI: 0.16-1.92; I 2 = 0%; 6 studies; 605 teeth; very low-certainty evidence), analgesic use (RR 1.25 95% CI: 0.75-2.09; I 2 = 36%; 6 studies, 540 teeth; very low-certainty evidence) and sinus tract or fistula presence (RR 1.00, 95% CI: 0.24-4.28; I 2 = 0%; 5 studies, 650 teeth; very low-certainty evidence). Interestingly, however, there was evidence to show that more participants reported pain after 1 week following RoCT completed in a single visit, compared to those in multiple visit groups (RR 1.55, 95% CI: 1.14-2.09; I 2 = 18%; 5 studies, 638 teeth; moderate-certainty evidence). Subgroup analysis showed there was an increase in post-treatment pain after 1 week for RoCT carried out in a single visit on vital teeth (RR 2.16, 95% CI: 1.39-3.36; I 2 = 0%; 2 studies, 316 teeth), and with the use of mechanical instrumentation (RR 1.80, 95% CI: 1.10-2.92; I 2 = 56%; 2 studies, 278 teeth). CONCLUSIONS: The current evidence shows that RoCT carried out in a single visit is no more effective than RoCT carried out over multiple visits; after 12 months, there is no difference in pain or complications with either approach. However, single visit RoCT has been shown to have increased post-operative pain after 1 week compared to RoCT completed over multiple visits.

Patient-adapted organ absorbed dose and effective dose estimates in pediatric 18F-FDG positron emission tomography/computed tomography studies.

BACKGROUND: Organ absorbed doses and effective doses can be used to compare radiation exposure among medical imaging procedures, compare alternative imaging options, and guide dose optimization efforts. Individual dose estimates are important for relatively radiosensitive patient populations such as children and for radiosensitive organs such as the eye lens. Software-based dose calculation methods conveniently calculate organ dose using patient-adjusted and examination-specific inputs. METHODS: Organ absorbed doses and effective doses were calculated for 429 pediatric 18F-FDG PET-CT patients. Patient-adjusted and scan-specific information was extracted from the electronic medical record and scanner dose-monitoring software. The VirtualDose and OLINDA/EXM (version 2.0) programs, respectively, were used to calculate the CT and the radiopharmaceutical organ absorbed doses and effective doses. Patients were grouped according to age at the time of the scan as follows: less than 1 year old, 1 to 5 years old, 6 to 10 years old, 11 to 15 years old, and 16 to 17 years old. RESULTS: The mean (+/- standard deviation, range) total PET plus CT effective dose was 14.5 (1.9, 11.2-22.3) mSv. The mean (+/- standard deviation, range) PET effective dose was 8.1 (1.2, 5.7-16.5) mSv. The mean (+/- standard deviation, range) CT effective dose was 6.4 (1.8, 2.9-14.7) mSv. The five organs with highest PET dose were: Urinary bladder, heart, liver, lungs, and brain. The five organs with highest CT dose were: Thymus, thyroid, kidneys, eye lens, and gonads. CONCLUSIONS: Organ and effective dose for both the CT and PET components can be estimated with actual patient and scan data using commercial software. Doses calculated using software generally agree with those calculated using dose conversion factors, although some organ doses were found to be appreciably different. Software-based dose calculation methods allow patient-adjusted dose factors. The effort to gather the needed patient data is justified by the resulting value of the characterization of patient-adjusted dosimetry.