No abstract

This bibliometric study analyzed the 100 most-cited papers about the use of lasers and their modalities in dentistry. A search strategy was created using specific keywords related to the topic. A comprehensive search was then conducted in the Web of Science Core Collection (WoS-CC) database up to July 2021. Papers that addressed the application of any type of laser and its modalities in dentistry were included. Each paper was cross-matched with the number of citations on Scopus and Google Scholar. The following data were extracted from papers: title, number of citations, authorship, country, year of publication, journal, study design, subject, laser type, and oral health outcomes. The VOSviewer software was used to generate bibliometric networks. The total number of citations ranged from 120 to 4,124 and 23 papers received more than 200 citations. Papers were published from 1964 to 2015. Most papers were from Europe (42%) and Anglo-Saxon America (27%). The USA was the country with more top 100 papers (25%). Papers were published mainly in Lasers in Surgery and Medicine (15%) and Lasers in Medical Science (7%). VOSviewer maps demonstrated the existence of national and international research collaborations among institutions and authors. Most studies had a laboratory design (57%) and were about restorative dentistry (32%) and periodontics (21%). This bibliometric study of the top 100 most-cited papers on lasers in dentistry allowed a quantitative and qualitative analysis of this very promising research field, revealing a net of collaboration and the importance of this topic in dentistry.

The aim of this systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized controlled trials was to evaluate the effectiveness of treatments for pain relief of burning mouth syndrome (BMS). Five databases and gray literature were searched. Independent reviewers selected studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. The primary outcome was pain relief or burning sensation, and the secondary outcomes were side effects, quality of life, salivary flow, and TNF-α and interleukin 6 levels. Four comparable interventions were grouped into different network geometries to ensure the transitivity assumption for pain: photobiomodulation therapy, alpha-lipoic acid, phytotherapics, and anxiolytics/antidepressants. Mean difference (MD) and 95% CI were calculated for continuous outcomes. The minimal important difference to consider a therapy beneficial against placebo was an MD of at least −1 for relief of pain. To interpret the results, the GRADE approach for NMA was used with a minimally contextualized framework and the magnitude of the effect. Forty-four trials were included (24 in the NMA). The anxiolytic (clonazepam) probably reduces the pain of BMS when compared with placebo (MD, −1.88; 95% CI, −2.61 to −1.16; moderate certainty). Photobiomodulation therapy (MD, −1.90; 95% CI, −3.58 to −0.21) and pregabalin (MD, −2.40; 95% CI, −3.49 to −1.32) achieved the minimal important difference of a beneficial effect with low or very low certainty. Among all tested treatments, only clonazepam is likely to reduce the pain of BMS when compared with placebo. The majority of the other treatments had low and very low certainty, mainly due to imprecision, indirectness, and intransitivity. More randomized controlled trials comparing treatments against placebo are encouraged to confirm the evidence and test possible alternative treatments (PROSPERO CRD42021255039).

No abstract

No abstract