Dataset Information

Local anaesthetics combined with vasoconstrictors in patients with cardiovascular disease undergoing dental procedures: systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

There is a lack of evidence about the use of local anaesthetics (LAs) in patients with cardiovascular diseases (CVD) in dental procedures. Thus, this study evaluated the safety of using LA with vasoconstrictor to determine the risk of cardiovascular events in patients with CVD.

Design

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Methods

We have searched in Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (via Ovid), EMBASE (via Ovid), Healthstar (via Ovid), CINAHL, Web of Science and ClinicalTrials.gov for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) up to January 2020. We have included RCTs involving adults with CVD within two groups: intervention group with LA with vasoconstrictor and control group with LA without vasoconstrictor. The primary outcomes assessed were death, mortality by a specific cause, stroke, acute myocardial infarction, hospitalisation, pain, bleeding and arrhythmias. The secondary outcomes were ST segment depression, anxiety, adverse effects and changes in haemodynamic parameters. The data were pooled using random effects meta-analyses and the confidence in the estimates was verified using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).

Results

Ten RCTs (n=478 participants) were included. Most of them had a high risk of bias. There were more cases of pain and bleeding in groups without vasoconstrictor. Meta-analysis demonstrated a decrease in the systolic blood pressure with the use of LA with vasoconstrictor (standard mean difference -0.95, 95% CI -1.35 to -0.55) after procedure. Overall, for the other outcomes assessed there was no statistical difference. The quality of evidence was considered low according to the GRADE profile.

Conclusions

The results suggest that the use of LA with vasoconstrictors (epinephrine in low doses) is safe in patients with some types of CVD. However, the low quality of evidence demonstrated that literature needs further studies in order to confirm these results.

Protocol registration

PROSPERO (CRD42016045421).

SUBMITTER: Guimaraes CC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8286772 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:INTRODUCTION:The use of vasoconstrictors combined with local anaesthetics (LAs) in dentistry for patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD) is still controversial in the scientific literature. It raises concerns regarding the possibility of transient episodes, triggering negative cardiovascular outcomes. METHOD/DESIGN:Trials eligible for our systematic review will enrol patients with CVD who have undergone dental treatments carried out with the use of LAs by comparing two arms: LAs with vasoconstrictors and LAs without vasoconstrictors. The research will be conducted in the electronic databases, namely Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, Healthstar (via Ovid), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and Web of Science, from their inception to December 2017, without any restrictions in terms of language and status of publication. A team of reviewers will independently assess titles, abstracts and complete text to determine eligibility. For eligible studies, the same reviewers will perform data extraction and evaluate the risk of bias in the selected articles. The selected outcomes comprise death, mortality by a specific cause, stroke, acute myocardial infarction, hospitalisation, pain, bleeding, arrhythmias, ischaemic episodes, anxiety, adverse effects, changes in blood pressure, changes in heart rate, anxiety and results obtained via oximetry. Whenever possible, we will conduct a meta-analysis to establish the effects of LAs with and without vasoconstrictors in the patients with CVD, and the overall quality of evidence for each outcome will be determined using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation classification system. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:Ethics committee approval was not necessary because this is a protocol of systematic review. This systematic review will be submitted for presentation at conferences and for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. Our review will assess the risks of cardiovascular events when using LAs with and without vasoconstrictors in patients with CVD, focusing on important clinical outcomes. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42016045421.

Project description:PurposeA systematic review to determine the effectiveness of intra-arterial anaesthetics on post- operative pain and opioid analgesia requirements in arterial embolisation procedures.Materials and methodsA systematic review of the literature was performed (Embase, PubMed, MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library) from inception to 10th August 2020. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies that utilised intra-arterial anaesthesia during an embolisation procedure for the purposes of pain control were included. Eligibility was assessed by two investigators independently.ResultsEight hundred fifty-nine candidate articles were identified, and 9 studies met the inclusion criteria (6 RCTs and 3 retrospective cohort studies). Four studies were of hepatic chemoembolisation and 5 were of uterine artery embolisation. Five hundred twenty-nine patients were treated in total. All studies used lidocaine as the anaesthetic with doses ranging from 20 to 200 mg, and the anaesthetic was delivered varyingly before, during or after embolisation. Pain intensity was converted to a numeric scale from 0 to 10, and opioid doses were converted to milligram morphine equivalent doses. A random-effects meta-analysis model was used to analyse the results of RCTs, and the results of cohort studies were summarised with a narrative synthesis. The meta-analyses suggested that pain scores were reduced by a mean of 1.02 (95% CI - 2.34 to 0.30; p = 0.13) and opioid doses were reduced by a mean of 7.35 mg (95% CI, - 14.77, 0.06; p = 0.05) in the intervention group however neither finding was statistically significant. No serious adverse events were reported.ConclusionIntra-arterial anaesthetic may slightly reduce pain intensity and post-operative opioid consumption following embolisation, however the results are not statistically significant. There is very limited data available on the effect of anaesthetic on length of hospital admission. Whilst no serious adverse events were reported, there are some concerns regarding the effect of lidocaine on the technical success of embolisation procedures that preclude our recommendation for routine use in embolisation procedures. High quality randomised controlled trials are required to elucidate the dose-response effect of lidocaine on opioid consumption and pain following embolisation, particularly in the first few hours post-operatively, as well as effects on duration of hospital stay.

Project description:BackgroundInterventional diagnostic and therapeutic procedures requiring intravascular iodinated contrast steadily increase patient exposure to the risks of contrast-induced acute kidney injury (CIAKI), which is associated with death, nonfatal cardiovascular events, and prolonged hospitalization. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments for CIAKI prevention in patients undergoing cardiovascular invasive procedures with iodinated contrast.Methods and findingsMEDLINE, Google Scholar, EMBASE and Cochrane databases as well as abstracts and presentations from major cardiovascular and nephrology meetings were searched, up to 22 April 2016. Eligible studies were randomized trials comparing strategies to prevent CIAKI (alone or in combination) when added to saline versus each other, saline, placebo, or no treatment in patients undergoing cardiovascular invasive procedures with administration of iodinated contrast. Two reviewers independently extracted trial-level data including number of patients, duration of follow-up, and outcomes. Eighteen strategies aimed at CIAKI prevention were identified. The primary outcome was the occurrence of CIAKI. Secondary outcomes were mortality, myocardial infarction, dialysis and heart failure. The data were pooled using network meta-analysis. Treatment estimates were calculated as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% credible intervals (CrI). 147 RCTs involving 33,463 patients were eligible. Saline plus N-acetylcysteine (OR 0.72, 95%CrI 0.57-0.88), ascorbic acid (0.59, 0.34-0.95), sodium bicarbonate plus N-acetylcysteine (0.59, 0.36-0.89), probucol (0.42, 0.15-0.91), methylxanthines (0.39, 0.20-0.66), statin (0.36, 0.21-0.59), device-guided matched hydration (0.35, 0.12-0.79), prostaglandins (0.26, 0.08-0.62) and trimetazidine (0.26, 0.09-0.59) were associated with lower odds of CIAKI compared to saline. Methylxanthines (0.12, 0.01-0.94) or left ventricular end-diastolic pressure-guided hydration (0.09, 0.01-0.59) were associated with lower mortality compared to saline.ConclusionsCurrently recommended treatment with saline as the only measure to prevent CIAKI during cardiovascular procedures may not represent the optimal strategy. Vasodilators, when added to saline, may significantly reduce the odds of CIAKI following cardiovascular procedures.

Project description:ObjectivesIt can be challenging to manage patients who are anxious during dental procedures. There is a lack of evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of oral sedation in adults. This study evaluated the effectiveness and safety of oral sedation in patients undergoing dental procedures.DesignSystematic review.MethodsRandomised clinical trials (RCTs) compared the oral use of benzodiazepines and other medications with a placebo or other oral agents in adult patients. A search of the Cochrane (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (via Ovid), EMBASE (via Ovid) and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (via Ovid) databases was conducted, without any restrictions on language or date of publication. The primary outcomes included the adverse effects and anxiety level. The secondary outcomes included sedation, satisfaction with the treatment, heart rate, respiratory rate, blood pressure and oxygen saturation. Reviewers, independently and in pairs, assessed each citation for eligibility, performed the data extraction and assessed the risk of bias. A narrative synthesis of the data was provided.ResultsA number of RCTs (n=327 patients) assessed the use of benzodiazepines (n=9) and herbal medicines (n=3). We found good satisfaction with treatment after the use of midazolam 7.5 mg or clonidine 150 µg and reduced anxiety with alprazolam (0.5 and 0.75 mg). Midazolam 15 mg promoted greater anxiety reduction than Passiflora incarnata L. 260 mg, while Valeriana officinalis 100 mg and Erythrina mulungu 500 mg were more effective than a placebo. More patients reported adverse effects with midazolam 15 mg. Diazepam 15 mg and V. officinalis 100 mg promoted less change in the heart rate and blood pressure than a placebo.ConclusionsGiven the limitations of the findings due to the quality of the included studies and the different comparisons made between interventions, further RCTs are required to confirm the effectiveness and safety of oral sedation in dentistry.Prospero registration numberCRD42017057142.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:The management of anxious patients undergoing dental procedures is still a challenge in clinical practice. Despite a wide variety of drugs for oral sedation in adult patients, there are relatively few systematic reviews that compare the effectiveness and safety of different drugs administered via this route. Thus, this study will evaluate the effectiveness and safety of oral sedation with benzodiazepines and other agents to patients undergoing dental surgical procedures. METHOD/DESIGN:We will conduct a systematic review and, if appropriate, a meta-analysis of randomised controlled clinical trials that will evaluate the use of conscious sedation administered orally to adult patients undergoing oral surgery. The search will be conducted using electronic databases, such as the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (via Ovid), EMBASE (via Ovid), CINAHL (via Ovid), Lilacs (SciELO) and Capes database, without restriction of languages or date of publication. Primary outcomes include anxiety, sedation, treatment satisfaction, pain and adverse effects. Secondary outcomes include vital parameters (heart rate, respiratory rate and blood pressure) and patient cooperation during intervention. A team of reviewers will independently assess each citation for eligibility and in duplicates. For eligible studies, the same reviewers will perform data extraction, risk of bias assessment and determination of the overall quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation classification system. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:The evidence gathered from this study should provide dental surgeons with knowledge on the effectiveness and safety of oral sedation in adults requiring dental surgical procedures. This in turn should contribute towards the decision-making process in dental practice, minimising the risks of anxiety and ineffective pain control in clinical procedures, as well as possible side effects. Ethics approval is not required in protocols for systematic reviews. The systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42017057142.