evidencegaps
Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

15 questions · 15 findings · 1 reviews · Endodontics and dental trauma

Sort:Best matchNewestHighest certaintyDownload CSV
No studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 3 · 20%Very low 4 · 26.7%Low 8 · 53.3%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) preoperative evaluation vs Conventional periapical radiography

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

It is very uncertain whether cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) preoperative evaluation changes healing - 1 year compared with conventional periapical radiography (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Guided tissue regeneration (GTR) with bovine bone mineral + resorbable collagen membrane vs No GTR (no grafting)

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

Guided tissue regeneration (GTR) with bovine bone mineral +… showed no clear difference in healing - 1 year compared with no GTR (no grafting) (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

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

Intermediate restorative material (IRM) root-end filling vs SuperEBA

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

It is very uncertain whether intermediate restorative material (IRM) root-end filling changes healing - 1 year or longer compared with superEBA (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Intermediate restorative material (IRM) root-end filling vs Gutta-percha

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

It is very uncertain whether intermediate restorative material (IRM) root-end filling changes healing - 1 year or longer compared with gutta-percha (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) graft vs No grafting

Radiographic healing - 1 year · People requiring retreatment of periapical lesions (failed root canal therapy)
1 finding from 1 review
  • Endodontic procedures for retreatment of periapical lesions 2016 · Cochrane All outcomes
    1 year
    Angerame 2015 (7 test, 4 control): no significant difference in healing of the lesion at 1 year; significant difference only at 2- and 3-month follow-up. Small preliminary study; no robust pooled analysis.
    1 study · 11 participants
    GRADE not reported