Efficacy of Diode Laser vs. Conventional Irrigation in Endodontic Treatment

Twelve randomized controlled trials with 863 participants form the basis of this systematic review. Mario G. Casaretto-Gamonal authored this meta-analysis comparing diode laser-assisted irrigation to conventional methods for treating apical periodontitis. The review, last updated in May 2026, follows PRISMA 2020 guidelines and is registered with PROSPERO.

Use Cases

• Compare bacterial reduction outcomes based on the primary outcome of bacterial load.
• Analyze postoperative pain control based on the primary outcome of postoperative pain.
• Assess radiographic healing rates based on the primary outcome of radiographic healing.
• Evaluate procedural safety based on the secondary outcome of adverse events.

Strengths

• Includes 12 randomized controlled trials, a standard for clinical evidence.
• Encompasses data from 863 total participants across the included studies.
• Follows PRISMA 2020 guidelines and uses the RoB 2.0 tool for bias assessment.

Limitations

• Description metadata is limited; actual data quality requires manual inspection after download.
• Methodological heterogeneity and variability in laser protocols limited comparability, as noted in the results.
• Row count is unknown, which may limit suitability assessment.

Provenance

Source

figshare

Collection Method

Systematic review and meta-analysis of literature from PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase.

Freshness

Last updated 2026-05-29 06:07:44; freshness should be verified.