Objective To systematically review the effectiveness of different therapies for chronic periapical lesion (CPL), such as different root canal surgeries and conventional root canal obturation. Methods The following databases such as The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMbase, VIP, CNKI, CMB and WanFang Data were searched to collect the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and concurrent controlled trials (CCTs) on CPL treated by both conventional root canal obturation and different root canal surgeries such as periapical curettage, retrograde obturation and apicoectomy. The references of the included studies were also retrieved, and the retrieval time was from inception to October 2012. Two reviewers independently screened the literature according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted the data, and assessed the quality. Then after cross-checking, the meta-analyses were performed by using RevMan 5.0 software. Results A total of 7 RCTs and 11 CCTs involving 1 663 patients were included. Among all 1 727 teeth, 1 661 met the inclusion criteria which contained 1 151 in the root canal surgeries groups, and 510 in the conventional groups. The methodological quality of all included studies was low. The results of meta-analysis showed that, in general, different root canal surgeries plus conventional root canal obturation were more effective than root canal obturation alone (RR=1.12, 95%CI 1.08 to 1.18, Plt;0.000 01). The results of sub-group analysis revealed that, the total effective rate of both retrograde obturation (RR=1.3, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.46, Plt;0.000 1) and apicoectomy (RR=1.23, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.46, P=0.02) was superior to that of periapical curettage, with significant differences in both sub-groups. But retrograde obturation took similar effect as apicoectomy did, without a significant difference (RR=0.96, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.11, P=0.61). Conclusion This systematic review suggests that, root canal obturation plus root canal surgeries is superior to root canal obturation alone in treating chronic periapical lesions. The comparison among different root canal surgeries reveals that, both apicoectomy and retrograde obturation are superior to periapical curettage. For the quantity and quality limitation of the included studies, additionally, the possibly existing bias because it is difficult to conduct surgeon and patient blind methods in root canal obturation and root canal surgeries in clinic, so the above conclusion has to be further proved by performing more well-designed and high quality RCTs.
Objective To identify and investigate the quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) in 11 non-key Chinese medical journals so as to learn about the current status and problems. Methods Eleven non-key medical journals of TCM from 1995 to 2000 were hand searched to identify the RCT and controlled clinical trials (CCTs). Each identified RCT or CCT was page by page verified by handsearchers based on the criteria developed by the Cochrane Handbook; the RCTs’ design, randomization method description, blind, baseline comparison, inclusion and exclusion criteria, diagnostic criteria,criteria for theraputic effectiveness, sample size, statistical method，described outcome, side effects, and follow up etc. were analyzed. Results In the related journals from 1995 to 2000, a total of 66 volumes and 390 issues were checked. As a result, 22 739 clinical studies were identified, of which 1 416 RCTs, only 24 (1.69%) were done with double blinding. There were 141 CCTs from 1995 to 2000, the total number of RCT increased from 95 to 1 416 and most of studies were on digestives diseases. Most of these studies had no detailed randomization method description, only 38 (2.68%) studies provided a methodology description. In addition, 1 220 (86.16% ) described outcome index, 1 203 (84.96%) used statistical method，934 (65.96%) had baseline comparison，828 (58.47%) described diagnostic criteria, 197 (13.91%) had inclusion and exclusion criteria，finally only 89 (6.29%) reported side effects. Conclusions Although the number of RCT has increased in the 11 non-key medical journals of TCM in the past six years, the quality of these RCTs needs to be improved.
ObjectivesTo assess the efficacy and safety of corticosteroid and antiviral agents for idiopathic facial nerve paralysis (IFNP) by network meta-analysis.MethodsPubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, CBM, CNKI, WangFang Data and VIP databases were electronically searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of corticosteroid and antiviral agents for IFNP from inception to January 31th, 2018. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. The meta-analysis was performed by R 3.3.3 and Stata 13.0 software.ResultsA total of 16 RCTs involving 3 061 patients were included. The results of network meta-analysis showed that: for the facial function recovery rates, corticosteroid plus antiviral agents was superior to placebo and antiviral agents alone at 3-month follow-up. Corticosteroid plus antiviral agents was superior to placebo, antiviral agents or corticosteroid alone at 6-month follow-up (if the satisfactory recovery was defined as a House-Brackmann grade class Ⅱ or below). When the follow-up exceeded 6 months, corticosteroid alone was superior to placebo and antiviral agents alone, corticosteroid plus antiviral agents was superior to placebo and antiviral agents alone. All of the differences above were statistically significant. For the sequelae, corticosteroid plus antiviral agents and corticosteroid alone were superior to placebo and antiviral agents alone. Corticosteroid plus antiviral agents was superior to corticosteroid alone. The differences were statistically significant. For the adverse events, there were no significant differences between any other pairwise comparisons of these different interventions.ConclusionConsidering the efficacy and safety, patients with IFNP treated corticosteroid plus antiviral agents are more likely to have a better recovery of facial function and less likely to develop sequelae, followed by corticosteroid alone. More high-quality, large scaled and multicenter RCTs are required to verify the conclusions above, and focus on the treatment of children and patients with severe facial paralysis.