Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

Refine by population, intervention, comparison or outcome
More filters
Evidence found and GRADE certainty

14 questions · 14 findings · 2 reviews · Oral Health

No studies found 3 · 21.4%GRADE not reported 3 · 21.4%Very low 3 · 21.4%Low 5 · 35.7%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs Super ethoxybenzoic acid (Super-EBA)

Treatment success rate · Patients needing retrograde filling in root canal therapy (orthograde root canal filling or retreatment not possible; periapical surgery…

Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) showed no clear difference in success rate at 4 years compared with super ethoxybenzoic acid (Super-EBA); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs Intermediate restorative material (IRM)

Success rate at 1 year · Patients needing retrograde filling in root canal therapy (orthograde root canal filling or retreatment not possible; periapical surgery…

It is very uncertain whether mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) changes success rate at 1 year compared with intermediate restorative material (IRM) (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs Root repair material (RRM)

Success rate at 1 year · Patients needing retrograde filling in root canal therapy (orthograde root canal filling or retreatment not possible; periapical surgery…

It is very uncertain whether mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) changes success rate at 1 year compared with root repair material (RRM) (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs Intermediate restorative material (IRM)

Success rate (radiographically‐assessed healing of cyst healing based on the Neer/Cole rating system) · Patients needing retrograde filling in root canal therapy (orthograde root canal filling or retreatment not possible; periapical surgery…

Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) showed no clear difference in success rate at 2 years compared with intermediate restorative material (IRM); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) vs Super ethoxybenzoic acid (Super-EBA)

Success rate at 1 year · Patients needing retrograde filling in root canal therapy (orthograde root canal filling or retreatment not possible; periapical surgery…

It is very uncertain whether mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) changes success rate at 1 year compared with super ethoxybenzoic acid (Super-EBA) (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) root-end filling vs Intermediate restorative material (IRM)

Prevalence of pain - 1 day · People requiring retreatment of periapical lesions (failed root canal therapy)

Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) root-end filling showed no clear difference in prevalence of pain - 1 day compared with intermediate restorative material (IRM) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) root-end filling vs Intermediate restorative material (IRM)

Healing rate · People requiring retreatment of periapical lesions (failed root canal therapy)

Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) root-end filling showed no clear difference in healing - 2 years compared with intermediate restorative material (IRM); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) root-end filling vs Gutta-percha smoothing (orthograde GP root filling)

Postoperative pain (VAS 0-100) - 1 day · People requiring retreatment of periapical lesions (failed root canal therapy)

Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) root-end filling showed no clear difference in postoperative pain (VAS 0-100) - 1 day compared with gutta-percha smoothing (orthograde GP root filling) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) root-end filling vs Gutta-percha smoothing (orthograde GP root filling)

Healing - 1 year · People requiring retreatment of periapical lesions (failed root canal therapy)

Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) root-end filling may leads to higher healing - 1 year compared with gutta-percha smoothing (orthograde GP root filling) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) root-end filling vs Intermediate restorative material (IRM)

Healing - 1 year · People requiring retreatment of periapical lesions (failed root canal therapy)

Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) root-end filling showed no clear difference in healing - 1 year compared with intermediate restorative material (IRM) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review