Guided tissue regeneration (GTR) with bovine bone mineral +… showed no clear difference in healing - 1 year compared with no GTR (no grafting) (low certainty).
Placebo (sham irradiation, laser inactive) led to lower maximum pain (verbal rating scale, VRS) compared with control (no laser device used); GRADE not reported.
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).
Surgical microscope (magnification) showed no clear difference in healing - 2 years (microscope vs endoscope) compared with endoscope (low certainty).
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).
It is very uncertain whether glass ionomer cement root-end filling changes healing - 1 year compared with amalgam (very low certainty).
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).
Ultrasonic device for root-end preparation showed no clear difference in healing - 1 year compared with conventional bur (low certainty).
Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) root-end filling showed no clear difference in healing - 1 year compared with intermediate restorative material (IRM) (low certainty).
Surgical loupes (magnification) showed no clear difference in healing - 1 year (loupes vs endoscope) compared with endoscope (low certainty).
No comparative effect estimate was reported; failure rates were tabulated.
No comparative effect estimate was reported; failure rates were 32% and 12%.
No comparative effect estimate was reported; both arms had 16% failure.
No comparative effect estimate was reported; tabulated failure rates favored resin-modified GIC.
No comparative effect estimate was reported; the 7-second etching arm had a lower tabulated failure rate.
No comparative effect estimate was reported; failure rates were tabulated.
No comparative effect estimate was reported; cumulative failure rates were tabulated.
No comparative effect estimate was reported; failure rates were tabulated.
No comparative effect estimate was reported; cumulative failure was highest for glass carbomer.
No comparative effect estimate was reported; composite resin outperformed HVGIC in the review narrative.