Evidence mapPaperPMID 31016540Full record

SynthesisClinical oral investigations2020

Efficacy and safety of selective COX-2 inhibitors for pain management after third molar removal: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

Albert González-Barnadas, Octavi Camps-Font, Pablo Martín-Fatás, Rui Figueiredo, Cosme Gay-Escoda, Eduard Valmaseda-Castellón

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical oral investigations, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Albert González-BarnadasFaculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Octavi Camps-FontFaculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Pablo Martín-FatásFaculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Rui FigueiredoFaculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. ruipfigueiredo@hotmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2122-6530
Cosme Gay-EscodaFaculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Eduard Valmaseda-CastellónFaculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Universitat de Barcelona · ESBellvitge University Hospital · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo compare selective COX-2 inhibitors with ibuprofen in terms of analgesia, rescue medication consumption, and adverse effects after impacted third molar removal. MATERIALS AND

methodsElectronic databases were searched. Single dose, double-blind, randomized, and controlled clinical trials comparing the analgesic effect of a selective COX-2 inhibitor versus at least one active control group using ibuprofen after impacted third molar removal were selected.

resultsTwelve studies were included for the qualitative synthesis and eight were included in the meta-analysis. No statistically significant differences were found between selective COX-2 inhibitors and ibuprofen in terms of pain relief after 6, 8, and 12 h. Rescue analgesia use after 24 h was significantly greater in the ibuprofen group than in the selective COX-2 inhibitor group. There were no statistically significant differences in the number of patients presenting one or more adverse events between the two groups, though ibuprofen intake was related with more nausea and vomiting.

conclusionsNo statistically significant differences were found in terms of pain relief 6, 8, and 12 h post-medication between selective COX-2 inhibitors and ibuprofen following totally or partially impacted third molar removal. The patients who consumed selective COX-2 inhibitors needed less rescue analgesia after 24 h. The occurrence of one or more adverse events was similar in both groups, though patients who consumed ibuprofen had more nausea and vomiting. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: COX-2 inhibitors could be considered a suitable alternative to ibuprofen for pain relief after third molar extraction in patients at risk of developing nausea and vomiting. Also, COX-2 inhibitors seem to slightly reduce the need of rescue medication consumption.

Indexed as

Molar, ThirdRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTooth ExtractionAnalgesicsCyclooxygenase 2 InhibitorsDouble-Blind MethodHumansPain ManagementPostoperative PainAnalgesicsCyclooxygenase 2 InhibitorsAnalgesicsCOX-2 inhibitorsIbuprofenPain reliefThird molars

Identifiers

PMID31016540
OpenAlexW2942495611

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.