Materials for retrograde filling in root canal therapy.
Journal
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews
ISSN: 1469-493X
Titre abrégé: Cochrane Database Syst Rev
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100909747
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
14 10 2021
14 10 2021
Historique:
entrez:
14
10
2021
pubmed:
15
10
2021
medline:
25
11
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Root canal therapy is a sequence of treatments involving root canal cleaning, shaping, decontamination, and obturation. It is conventionally performed through a hole drilled into the crown of the affected tooth, namely orthograde root canal therapy. When it fails, retrograde filling, which seals the root canal from the root apex, is a good alternative. Many materials are used for retrograde filling. Since none meets all the criteria an ideal material should possess, selecting the most efficacious material is of utmost importance. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2016. To determine the effects of different materials used for retrograde filling in children and adults for whom retrograde filling is necessary in order to save the tooth. An Information Specialist searched five bibliographic databases up to 21 April 2021 and used additional search methods to identify published, unpublished, and ongoing studies. We also searched four databases in the Chinese language. We selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared different retrograde filling materials, with the reported success rate that was assessed by clinical or radiological methods for which the follow-up period was at least 12 months. Records were screened in duplicate by independent screeners. Two review authors extracted data independently and in duplicate. Original trial authors were contacted for any missing information. Two review authors independently assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. We followed Cochrane's statistical guidelines and assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. We included eight studies, all at high risk of bias, involving 1399 participants with 1471 teeth, published between 1995 and 2019, and six comparisons of retrograde filling materials. - Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) versus intermediate restorative material (IRM): there may be little to no effect of MTA compared to IRM on success rate at one year, but the evidence is very uncertain (risk ratio (RR) 1.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97 to 1.22; I Based on the present limited evidence, there is insufficient evidence to draw any conclusion as to the benefits of any one material over another for retrograde filling in root canal therapy. We conclude that more high-quality RCTs are required.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Root canal therapy is a sequence of treatments involving root canal cleaning, shaping, decontamination, and obturation. It is conventionally performed through a hole drilled into the crown of the affected tooth, namely orthograde root canal therapy. When it fails, retrograde filling, which seals the root canal from the root apex, is a good alternative. Many materials are used for retrograde filling. Since none meets all the criteria an ideal material should possess, selecting the most efficacious material is of utmost importance. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2016.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the effects of different materials used for retrograde filling in children and adults for whom retrograde filling is necessary in order to save the tooth.
SEARCH METHODS
An Information Specialist searched five bibliographic databases up to 21 April 2021 and used additional search methods to identify published, unpublished, and ongoing studies. We also searched four databases in the Chinese language.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared different retrograde filling materials, with the reported success rate that was assessed by clinical or radiological methods for which the follow-up period was at least 12 months.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Records were screened in duplicate by independent screeners. Two review authors extracted data independently and in duplicate. Original trial authors were contacted for any missing information. Two review authors independently assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. We followed Cochrane's statistical guidelines and assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We included eight studies, all at high risk of bias, involving 1399 participants with 1471 teeth, published between 1995 and 2019, and six comparisons of retrograde filling materials. - Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) versus intermediate restorative material (IRM): there may be little to no effect of MTA compared to IRM on success rate at one year, but the evidence is very uncertain (risk ratio (RR) 1.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97 to 1.22; I
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Based on the present limited evidence, there is insufficient evidence to draw any conclusion as to the benefits of any one material over another for retrograde filling in root canal therapy. We conclude that more high-quality RCTs are required.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34647617
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005517.pub3
pmc: PMC8515509
doi:
Substances chimiques
Glass Ionomer Cements
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Review
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
CD005517Commentaires et corrections
Type : UpdateOf
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Références
J Endod. 2016 Apr;42(4):533-7
pubmed: 26898567
J Endod. 2016 Jul;42(7):997-1002
pubmed: 27215809
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2005 Oct;100(4):495-500
pubmed: 16200680
Dent Mater. 2005 Apr;21(4):297-303
pubmed: 15766576
Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009 Mar;13(1):21-6
pubmed: 19023604
J Endod. 1994 Jan;20(1):22-6
pubmed: 8182382
J Endod. 2017 Jan;43(1):1-6
pubmed: 27986096
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2004 May 25;2:26
pubmed: 15161494
Dent Clin North Am. 2004 Jan;48(1):291-307
pubmed: 15066517
Int Endod J. 2000 Mar;33(2):91-8
pubmed: 11307456
Injury. 2006 Apr;37(4):321-7
pubmed: 16488417
J Endod. 2006 Jul;32(7):601-23
pubmed: 16793466
Int Endod J. 2003 Aug;36(8):520-6
pubmed: 12887380
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1999 Apr;87(4):398-404
pubmed: 10225620
Dent Clin North Am. 1992 Apr;36(2):357-78
pubmed: 1572504
J Endod. 1993 Nov;19(11):541-4
pubmed: 8151240
J Dent (Tehran). 2014 Mar;11(2):143-9
pubmed: 24910689
Biometrics. 1994 Dec;50(4):1088-101
pubmed: 7786990
J Indian Dent Assoc. 1983 Apr;55(4):153-8
pubmed: 6582137
Endod Dent Traumatol. 1991 Jun;7(3):126-31
pubmed: 1838330
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2009 Nov;108(5):784-9
pubmed: 19748297
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Dec 17;12:CD005517
pubmed: 27991646
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2003 Oct;96(4):472-7
pubmed: 14561974
J Endod. 2012 May;38(5):570-9
pubmed: 22515881
J Endod. 2005 May;31(5):341-9
pubmed: 15851926
Int J Oral Surg. 1979 Jun;8(3):173-85
pubmed: 118123
J Endod. 1990 Jul;16(7):307-10
pubmed: 2081943
J Endod. 1990 Oct;16(10):498-504
pubmed: 2084204
Int Endod J. 2006 May;39(5):415-22
pubmed: 16640642
Int Endod J. 2009 Feb;42(2):105-14
pubmed: 19134038
Biomaterials. 2004 Feb;25(5):787-93
pubmed: 14609667
Int Endod J. 2012 May;45(5):439-48
pubmed: 22188368
J Endod. 1993 Dec;19(12):591-5
pubmed: 8151252
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1977 Apr;43(4):621-6
pubmed: 265491
Aust Endod J. 2019 Apr;45(1):111-121
pubmed: 29450937
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1987 Aug;16(4):432-9
pubmed: 3117915
J Endod. 2011 Mar;37(3):372-5
pubmed: 21329824
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1991 May;71(5):603-11
pubmed: 2047103
J Endod. 2005 Jun;31(6):444-9
pubmed: 15917684
Int Endod J. 2003 Mar;36(3):147-60
pubmed: 12657140
J Endod. 2012 Jul;38(7):875-9
pubmed: 22703646
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2004 Apr;97(4):508-12
pubmed: 15088036
Int Endod J. 2003 Sep;36(9):577-85
pubmed: 12950570
Endod Dent Traumatol. 1991 Oct;7(5):189-95
pubmed: 1687387
Br Dent J. 1993 Nov 20;175(10):355-62
pubmed: 8257645
J Endod. 1983 May;9(5):198-202
pubmed: 6574207
Int Endod J. 2006 Oct;39(10):747-54
pubmed: 16948659
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2011 Aug;112(2):258-63
pubmed: 21458326
Dent Clin North Am. 2004 Jan;48(1):265-89
pubmed: 15066516
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1994 Jul;78(1):101-4
pubmed: 8078650
BMJ. 2004 Jun 19;328(7454):1490
pubmed: 15205295
J Endod. 2019 Jul;45(7):831-839
pubmed: 31078325
J Endod. 1990 Aug;16(8):391-3
pubmed: 2081958
J Endod. 2007 Sep;33(9):1094-7
pubmed: 17931941
Clin Oral Investig. 2002 Dec;6(4):236-43
pubmed: 12483239
Acta Cir Bras. 2016 Jun;31(6):422-7
pubmed: 27355751
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1995 Jan;79(1):101-3
pubmed: 7614147
Int Endod J. 2003 Jul;36(7):453-63
pubmed: 12823700
Scand J Dent Res. 1970;78(3):251-5
pubmed: 5273693
J Endod. 1995 Jul;21(7):349-53
pubmed: 7499973
Sven Tandlak Tidskr. 1974 May;67(3):123-313
pubmed: 4526186
Quintessence Int. 2010 Jul-Aug;41(7):557-66
pubmed: 20614042
Int J Oral Surg. 1972;1(4):195-214
pubmed: 4199168
J Endod. 1990 Sep;16(9):411-7
pubmed: 2098457
Br Dent J. 1970 Nov 3;129(9):407-13
pubmed: 5278365
J Endod. 2007 Oct;33(10):1231-4
pubmed: 17889696
J Endod. 1996 May;22(5):264-8
pubmed: 8632141
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1991 Apr;71(4):489-91
pubmed: 2052335
J Endod. 1996 Sep;22(9):477-80
pubmed: 9198430
J Endod. 2008 May;34(5):590-3
pubmed: 18436041
J Endod. 2015 May;41(5):607-12
pubmed: 25702859
Int Endod J. 2001 Jan;34(1):1-10
pubmed: 11307374
J Endod. 1998 Aug;24(8):543-7
pubmed: 9759017
J Endod. 2008 Aug;34(8):970-4
pubmed: 18634929