Treatments for painful temporomandibular disc displacement with reduction: a network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

There is currently no consensus on the best treatment for painful temporomandibular disc displacement with reduction (DDwR), and no network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing all types of treatment for this condition has been conducted. The objective of this study was to compare and rank all treatments for DDwR, including conservative treatments, occlusal splints, low-level laser therapy (LLLT), manual therapy, no treatment (control), arthrocentesis (Arthro) alone, Arthro plus intra-articular injection of platelet-rich plasma (Arthro-PRP) or hyaluronic acid (Arthro-HA), and Arthro plus occlusal splint. Predictor variables were pain intensity and maximum mouth opening (MMO). The mean difference with 95% confidence interval was estimated using Stata software. The GRADE system was used to assess the certainty of the evidence. Twenty RCTs reporting 1107 patients were identified in the literature search; 980 of these patients were included in the network meta-analysis. Direct meta-analysis showed that Arthro-PRP significantly reduced pain intensity compared to Arthro alone, while occlusal splint and manual therapy were superior to conservative treatment (all very low quality evidence). Arthro with intra-articular injection of PRP/HA ranked as the most effective treatment in terms of pain reduction, whereas LLLT ranked the best choice for increasing MMO for patients with DDwR. However, it is important to note that the evidence for the superiority of these treatments is generally of very low quality. Therefore, further high-quality research is needed to confirm these findings and provide more reliable recommendations for the treatment of DDwR.

Management of clinically node-negative early-stage oral cancer: network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

The best treatments for the clinically node-negative (cN0) neck in early-stage oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) patients are a subject of ongoing debate and there is no consensus. A network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) was conducted to determine the most effective treatment and to rank treatments based on their effectiveness. A systematic search was performed in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines to retrieve RCTs that compared therapeutic neck dissection (TND), sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB), and elective neck dissection (END). The outcomes analysed were overall survival (OS), disease-specific survival (DSS), disease-free survival (DFS), and nodal recurrence. Hazard ratios and risk ratios were calculated by direct meta-analysis and NMA. Ten RCTs with a total of 1858 patients were eligible for inclusion. Direct meta-analysis showed END to be superior to TND and comparable to SLNB. The NMA revealed no statistically significant difference between END and SLNB (very low quality evidence) regarding OS, DSS, DFS, and nodal recurrence. However, END was found to significantly improve OS and DFS, and reduce nodal recurrence when compared to TND (moderate quality evidence). END ranked as probably the top treatment option for maximizing OS and DSS, and reducing nodal recurrence in early-stage OSCC, followed by SLNB and TND. There was very low quality evidence supporting SLNB as non-inferior to END for patients with early-stage OSCC. This NMA yielded favourable results for the use of END (with moderate quality evidence) in early-stage OSCC patients, although excellent results have also been obtained with SLNB. However, data in the literature for SLNB are scarce, as this technique has not yet been formalized in many countries. There is a need to further explore SLNB for early-stage OSCC patients, as well as its value in detecting occult lymph node metastases on the contralateral side. More studies comparing morbidity, quality of life, and costs between the different management strategies for the clinically negative neck in early-stage OSCC patients are needed.

Do osteoconductive bone substitutes result in similar bone regeneration for maxillary sinus augmentation when compared to osteogenic and osteoinductive bone grafts? A systematic review and frequentist network meta-analysis.

The purpose of this network meta-analysis was to identify the most effective biomaterials producing higher new bone formation (NBF) and lower residual graft (RG) and connective tissue (CT) following maxillary sinus augmentation (MSA), and to generate a ranking based on their performance. The MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL databases were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published until March 2018, evaluating histomorphometric outcomes after MSA. Predictor variables were autogenous bone (AB), allografts (AG), xenografts (XG), alloplastic bone (AP), AB+XG, AB+AP, AG+XG, XG+AP, and grafts combined with autologous platelet concentrates/recombinant growth factors, mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), or recombinant bone morphogenetic proteins (BMPs). Outcome variables were NBF%, RG%, and CT%. Healing time was considered. The weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated via frequentist network meta-analysis using Stata software. Fifty-two RCTs (1483 biopsies) were included. At a healing time <6 months, AB was superior to AP (WMD-10.66%, 95% CI-16.38% to -4.94%) and XG (WMD-7.93%, 95% CI-15.11% to -0.75%) for NBF. Regarding CT, AB was superior to XG+AP, AP, MSCs, and XG. At a healing time ≥6 months, NBF was higher for AB than AP (WMD-7.06%, 95% CI-12.59% to -1.52%). RG was lower in AB than AP (WMD 12.03%, 95% CI 3.04% to 21.03%), XG (WMD 14.62%, 95% CI 4.25% to 24.98%), and growth factors (WMD 12.32%, 95% CI 0.04% to 24.60%). The three highest ranked biomaterials for increasing NBF were AG+XG (95%, very low quality evidence), growth factors (69.9%, low quality evidence), and AB alone (69.8%, moderate quality evidence). The three highest ranked biomaterials for decreasing RG were BMPs (88.8%, very low quality evidence), AB alone (81.5%, moderate quality evidence), and AB+AP (58.9%, very low quality evidence). Finally, XG+AP (84.7%, low quality evidence), AP alone (77.7%, moderate quality evidence), and MSCs (76.1%, low quality evidence), were the three highest ranked biomaterials for decreasing the amount of CT. Network meta-analysis provided moderate quality evidence that AB alone is probably the best option to obtain greater NBF after MSA in the first 6 months after surgery. Additionally, the results of this network meta-analysis support the hypothesis that osteoconductive bone substitute materials should be combined with osteogenic or osteoinductive grafts for superior histomorphometric outcomes in MSA.

Does the piezoelectric surgical technique produce fewer postoperative sequelae after lower third molar surgery than conventional rotary instruments? A systematic review and meta analysis.

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to answer the clinical question "Does the piezoelectric surgical technique produce fewer postoperative sequelae after lower third molar surgery than conventional rotary instruments?" A systematic and electronic search of several databases with specific key words, a reference search, and a manual search were performed from respective dates of inception through November 2014. The inclusion criteria were clinical human studies, including randomized controlled trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials (CCTs), and retrospective studies, with the aim of comparing the piezoelectric surgical osteotomy technique to the standard rotary instrument technique in lower third molar surgery. Postoperative sequelae (oedema, trismus, and pain), the total number of analgesics taken, and the duration of surgery were analyzed. A total of nine articles were included, six RCTs, two CCTs, and one retrospective study. Six studies had a low risk of bias and three had a moderate risk of bias. A statistically significant difference was found between piezoelectric surgery and conventional rotary instrument surgery for lower third molar extraction with regard to postoperative sequelae (oedema, trismus, and pain) and the total number of analgesics taken (P=0.0001, P=0.0001, P<0.00001, and P<0.0001, respectively). However, a statistically significant increased surgery time was required in the piezoelectric osteotomy group (P<0.00001). The results of the meta-analysis showed that piezoelectric surgery significantly reduced the occurrence of postoperative sequelae (oedema, trismus, and pain) and the total number of analgesics taken compared to the conventional rotary instrument technique in lower third molar surgery, but required a longer surgery time.