One large prospective cohort study reported that there was no statistically significant difference in the frequency of complications for deep sedation/GA compared with moderate sedation for patients undergoing third-molar extraction (adjusted odds ratio: 1.63 [95% CI, 0.95 to 2.81]). One small prospective study conducted in Turkey, demonstrated that CS was associated with statistically significantly lower oxygen saturation compared with GA (98.4% versus 99.0%; P < 0.001) and a statistically significantly shorter duration for the procedure (30 minutes versus 60 minutes; P < 0.001). One small retrospective cohort study reported that patients who were treated for ECC under GA were statistically significantly more likely to exhibit positive behavior during follow-up dental examinations at six months compared with those who received CS (OR 3.9 [95% CI, 1.5 to 10.2]); however, there were no statistically significant differences at 12 or 18 months. Indigenous populations were a subgroup of interest for this review; however, there were no studies identified that specifically addressed this population.

One clinical practice guideline from the United Kingdom recommended the following clinical circumstances as situations where the use of GA may be suitable: severe pulpitis requiring immediate relief; acute soft tissue swelling requiring removal of the infected tooth/teeth; surgical drainage of an acute infected swelling; single or multiple extractions in a young child unsuitable for conscious sedation; symptomatic teeth ≥1 quadrant; moderately traumatic or complex extractions; teeth requiring surgical removal or exposure; biopsy of a hard or soft tissue lesion; debridement and suturing of orofacial wounds; established allergy to local anesthesia; and post-operative hemorrhage requiring packing and suturing. There were no evidenced-based guidelines identified in the literature search that specifically addressed the volume of dental procedures that could be carried out under a single deep sedation or GA.