Question · asked by 1 review
Super ethoxybenzoic acid (Super-EBA) vs Intermediate restorative material (IRM): Adverse events
- Population
- Patients needing retrograde filling in root canal therapy (orthograde root canal filling or retreatment not possible; periapical surgery used to save the tooth); no age or gender limitations
- Intervention
- Super ethoxybenzoic acid (Super-EBA)
- Comparison
- Intermediate restorative material (IRM)
- Outcome
- Adverse events
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Super ethoxybenzoic acid (Super-EBA) vs Intermediate restorative material (IRM) Adverse events · Patients needing retrograde filling in root canal therapy (orthograde root canal filling or retreatment not possible;… The review found no eligible studies for this question. Materials for retrograde filling in root canal therapy (2021) · Cochrane All outcomes | Adverse events: outcome was not assessed by the included studies | 0 studies | No studies found |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Materials for retrograde filling in root canal therapy 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes | 2021-04 | Not listed | Not assessed |
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.