Influence of the root canal filling technique on the success rate of primary endodontic treatments: a systematic review.

Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics Pub Date : 2022-10-11 eCollection Date: 2022-11-01 DOI:10.5395/rde.2022.47.e40
Daniel Feijolo Marconi, Giovana Siocheta da Silva, Theodoro Weissheimer, Isadora Ames Silva, Gabriel Barcelos Só, Leonardo Thomasi Jahnke, Jovito Adiel Skupien, Marcus Vinicius Reis Só, Ricardo Abreu da Rosa
{"title":"Influence of the root canal filling technique on the success rate of primary endodontic treatments: a systematic review.","authors":"Daniel Feijolo Marconi, Giovana Siocheta da Silva, Theodoro Weissheimer, Isadora Ames Silva, Gabriel Barcelos Só, Leonardo Thomasi Jahnke, Jovito Adiel Skupien, Marcus Vinicius Reis Só, Ricardo Abreu da Rosa","doi":"10.5395/rde.2022.47.e40","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aimed to investigate the influence of different obturation techniques compared to cold lateral compaction on the success rate of primary non-surgical endodontic treatments.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Systematic searches were performed for studies published up to May 17<sup>th</sup>, 2022 in MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, EMBASE, and Grey Literature Reports. Randomized clinical trials and nonrandomized (nonrandomized clinical trials, prospective or retrospective) studies that evaluated the success rate of primary non-surgical endodontic treatments obturated with the cold lateral compaction (control) and other obturation techniques were included. The revised Cochrane risk of bias tools for randomized trials (RoB 2) and nonrandomized studies of interventions (ROBINS-I) were used to evaluate the risk of bias. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) tool was used to evaluate the certainty of evidence.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eleven studies (4 randomized clinical trials (RCTs), 4 prospective, and 3 retrospectives) were included. Two RCTs were classified as having some concerns risk of bias and 2 as a low risk of bias. Two nonrandomized studies were classified as having a critical risk of bias and 5 as having a moderate risk of bias. The GRADE analysis demonstrated a very low to moderate certainty of evidence.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This systematic review generally evidenced no differences in the success rate of primary non-surgical endodontic treatments when the cold lateral compaction technique and other obturation techniques are performed. Further well-designed studies are still necessary.</p>","PeriodicalId":21102,"journal":{"name":"Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics","volume":"47 4","pages":"e40"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/c6/04/rde-47-e40.PMC9715375.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2022.47.e40","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/11/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the influence of different obturation techniques compared to cold lateral compaction on the success rate of primary non-surgical endodontic treatments.

Materials and methods: Systematic searches were performed for studies published up to May 17th, 2022 in MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, EMBASE, and Grey Literature Reports. Randomized clinical trials and nonrandomized (nonrandomized clinical trials, prospective or retrospective) studies that evaluated the success rate of primary non-surgical endodontic treatments obturated with the cold lateral compaction (control) and other obturation techniques were included. The revised Cochrane risk of bias tools for randomized trials (RoB 2) and nonrandomized studies of interventions (ROBINS-I) were used to evaluate the risk of bias. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) tool was used to evaluate the certainty of evidence.

Results: Eleven studies (4 randomized clinical trials (RCTs), 4 prospective, and 3 retrospectives) were included. Two RCTs were classified as having some concerns risk of bias and 2 as a low risk of bias. Two nonrandomized studies were classified as having a critical risk of bias and 5 as having a moderate risk of bias. The GRADE analysis demonstrated a very low to moderate certainty of evidence.

Conclusions: This systematic review generally evidenced no differences in the success rate of primary non-surgical endodontic treatments when the cold lateral compaction technique and other obturation techniques are performed. Further well-designed studies are still necessary.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

根管充填技术对初级根管治疗成功率的影响:系统性综述。
研究目的本研究旨在探究与冷侧方压片相比,不同的封闭技术对初级非手术根管治疗成功率的影响:系统检索了截至 2022 年 5 月 17 日在 MEDLINE/PubMed、Cochrane Library、Web of Science、Scopus、EMBASE 和灰色文献报告中发表的研究。纳入的研究包括随机临床试验和非随机(非随机临床试验、前瞻性或回顾性)研究,这些研究评估了使用冷侧向压实法(对照)和其他压实技术进行初次非手术根管治疗的成功率。评估偏倚风险时使用了修订版 Cochrane 随机试验偏倚风险工具 (RoB 2) 和非随机干预研究偏倚风险工具 (ROBINS-I)。建议评估、发展和评价分级(GRADE)工具用于评估证据的确定性:共纳入 11 项研究(4 项随机临床试验 (RCT)、4 项前瞻性研究和 3 项回顾性研究)。其中两项随机临床试验被归类为存在一定的偏倚风险,两项为低偏倚风险。两项非随机研究被归类为存在严重偏倚风险,5 项被归类为存在中度偏倚风险。GRADE 分析显示,证据的确定性从很低到中等:本系统综述总体上证明了冷侧压技术和其他封闭技术在初级非手术根管治疗的成功率上没有差异。仍有必要进一步开展设计良好的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
35
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信