Cochrane · intervention · CD005969

Magnification devices for endodontic therapy

Del Fabbro, M, Taschieri, S, Lodi, G, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2015 · Cochrane Library

Oral Health Endodontics and dental trauma3 versionsAMSTAR 2: not assessed

Full textEvery question was extracted from the full review (methods and results), not only its Summary of Findings table.

Questions

current version

GRADE rated

No studies

Included studies

as reported

No studies 12 · 100%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.

Review question

Element	Planned (methods)	Found (results)
Population	Patients of any age who received endodontic therapy and were followed up for at least one year after treatment	None (no eligible studies included)
Intervention	Surgical or non-surgical endodontic treatment performed with the aid of one or more types of magnification devices, compared with the same intervention without visual enhancers; trials comparing one magnification device with another were also included	None (no eligible studies included)
Comparison	The same kind of endodontic intervention performed without visual enhancers (or a different magnification device)	None (no eligible studies included)
Outcomes	Primary: success of treatment (clinical assessment of signs and symptoms combined with periapical radiographic healing). Secondary: possibility and ease of removing broken instruments from the canal; quality of visualisation of root canal anatomy and morphology; quality of root-end filling (retrograde treatment); possibility of perforation repair; total time required to complete the clinical procedure	None (no eligible studies included)
Study designs	All RCTs and quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing endodontic therapy with versus without one or more magnification devices, or comparing two or more magnification devices used as an adjunct to endodontic therapy	None (no eligible studies included)
Timing	At least one year after treatment	None (no eligible studies included)

Search date: 2015-10. Databases: Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE via OVID (1946 to 13 October 2015); EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 13 October 2015); US National Institutes of Health Trials Register (clinicaltrials.gov); WHO Clinical Trials Registry Platform

Questions and results

Current version only

Endodontic therapy (surgical or non-surgical) performed with the aid of one or more magnification devices (surgical microscope, endoscope or magnifying loupes) vs The same endodontic therapy performed without magnification devices (without visual enhancers)

Population: Patients of any age who received endodontic therapy and were followed up for at least 1 year after treatment

CD005969.PUB3 (current) · 6 questions

Outcome	Effect	Evidence	Status / GRADE
Removal of broken (fractured) instruments from the root canal same question in other reviews	No included study assessed this outcome; the review notes that such secondary outcomes were only sporadically reported and were never statistically assessed.	NR	No studies
Repair of root perforations same question in other reviews	No included study assessed this outcome; the review notes that such secondary outcomes were only sporadically reported and were never statistically assessed.	NR	No studies
Quality of root-end filling (retrograde/surgical treatment) same question in other reviews	No included study assessed this outcome; the review notes that such secondary outcomes were only sporadically reported and were never statistically assessed.	NR	No studies
Total time required to complete the clinical procedure same question in other reviews	No included study assessed procedure time; such outcomes were only sporadically reported and were never statistically assessed.	NR	No studies
Treatment success (resolution of clinical signs and symptoms with periapical radiographic healing) >=1 year after treatment same question in other reviews	None of the studies fulfilled our inclusion criteria and therefore no data analysis was conducted (three potentially eligible trials were identified from 1234 records; all were excluded).	NR	No studies
Quality of visualisation of root canal anatomy and morphology same question in other reviews	No included study assessed this outcome; the review notes that such secondary outcomes were only sporadically reported and were never statistically assessed.	NR	No studies

Endodontic therapy performed with one type of magnification device (surgical microscope, endoscope or magnifying loupes) vs Endodontic therapy performed with a different type of magnification device

Population: Patients of any age who received endodontic therapy and were followed up for at least 1 year after treatment

CD005969.PUB3 (current) · 6 questions

Outcome	Effect	Evidence	Status / GRADE
Quality of root-end filling (retrograde/surgical treatment) same question in other reviews	No included study assessed this outcome; the review notes that such secondary outcomes were only sporadically reported and were never statistically assessed.	NR	No studies
Repair of root perforations same question in other reviews	No included study assessed this outcome; the review notes that such secondary outcomes were only sporadically reported and were never statistically assessed.	NR	No studies
Total time required to complete the clinical procedure same question in other reviews	No included study assessed procedure time. In the excluded trial Taschieri 2008, based on the operators' experience, completing the surgical procedure took on average four to five minutes longer for the endoscope than…	NR	No studies
Treatment success (resolution of clinical signs and symptoms with periapical radiographic healing) >=1 year after treatment same question in other reviews	None of the studies fulfilled our inclusion criteria; the only trial comparing three magnification devices (Taschieri 2008) was excluded, so no data analysis was conducted.	NR	No studies
Removal of broken (fractured) instruments from the root canal same question in other reviews	No included study assessed this outcome; the review notes that such secondary outcomes were only sporadically reported and were never statistically assessed.	NR	No studies
Quality of visualisation of root canal anatomy and morphology same question in other reviews	No included study assessed this outcome; the review notes that such secondary outcomes were only sporadically reported and were never statistically assessed.	NR	No studies

Endodontic therapy (surgical or non-surgical) performed with the aid of one or more magnification devices (surgical microscope, endoscope or magnifying loupes) vs The same endodontic therapy performed without magnification devices (without visual enhancers)

Population: Patients who received endodontic therapy and were followed up for at least 1 year after treatment

CD005969.PUB2 · 6 questions

Outcome	Effect	Evidence	Status / GRADE
Quality of visualisation of root canal anatomy and morphology	No included study assessed this outcome; the review notes that such secondary outcomes were only sporadically reported and were never statistically assessed.	NR	No studies
Treatment success (resolution of clinical signs and symptoms with periapical radiographic healing) >=1 year after treatment	No randomised clinical trial was found where endodontic treatment (either surgical or non-surgical) performed with the aid of a magnification device was compared with the same treatment without using magnificators.	NR	No studies
Quality of root-end filling (retrograde/surgical treatment)	No included study assessed this outcome; the review notes that such secondary outcomes were only sporadically reported and were never statistically assessed.	NR	No studies
Repair of root perforations	No included study assessed this outcome; the review notes that such secondary outcomes were only sporadically reported and were never statistically assessed.	NR	No studies
Removal of broken (fractured) instruments from the root canal	No included study assessed this outcome; the review notes that such secondary outcomes were only sporadically reported and were never statistically assessed.	NR	No studies
Total time required to complete the clinical procedure	No included study assessed procedure time; such outcomes were only sporadically reported and were never statistically assessed.	NR	No studies

Endodontic therapy performed with one type of magnification device (surgical microscope, endoscope or magnifying loupes) vs Endodontic therapy performed with a different type of magnification device

Population: Patients who received endodontic therapy and were followed up for at least 1 year after treatment

CD005969.PUB2 · 6 questions

Outcome	Effect	Evidence	Status / GRADE
Repair of root perforations	No included study assessed this outcome; the review notes that such secondary outcomes were only sporadically reported and were never statistically assessed.	NR	No studies
Quality of root-end filling (retrograde/surgical treatment)	No included study assessed this outcome; the review notes that such secondary outcomes were only sporadically reported and were never statistically assessed.	NR	No studies
Total time required to complete the clinical procedure	No included study assessed procedure time. In the excluded trial Taschieri 2008, based on the operators' experience, completing the surgical procedure took on average four to five minutes longer for the endoscope than…	NR	No studies
Quality of visualisation of root canal anatomy and morphology	No included study assessed this outcome; the review notes that such secondary outcomes were only sporadically reported and were never statistically assessed.	NR	No studies
Removal of broken (fractured) instruments from the root canal	No included study assessed this outcome; the review notes that such secondary outcomes were only sporadically reported and were never statistically assessed.	NR	No studies
Treatment success (resolution of clinical signs and symptoms with periapical radiographic healing) >=1 year after treatment	No trial involving the comparison among different types of magnification devices in endodontic surgery alone could be included in the present review. Only one RCT was identified comparing three magnificators…	NR	No studies

Endodontic therapy (surgical or non-surgical) performed with the aid of one or more magnification devices (surgical microscope, endoscope or magnifying loupes) vs The same endodontic therapy performed without magnification devices (without visual enhancers)

Population: Patients who received endodontic therapy and were followed up for at least 4 years after treatment

CD005969 · 6 questions

Outcome	Effect	Evidence	Status / GRADE
Quality of visualisation of root canal anatomy and morphology	no estimate extracted	NR	No studies
Removal of broken (fractured) instruments from the root canal	no estimate extracted	NR	No studies
Repair of root perforations	no estimate extracted	NR	No studies
Treatment success (resolution of clinical signs and symptoms with periapical radiographic healing) >=4 years after treatment	no estimate extracted	NR	No studies
Total time required to complete the clinical procedure	no estimate extracted	NR	No studies
Quality of root-end filling (retrograde/surgical treatment)	no estimate extracted	NR	No studies

Endodontic therapy performed with one type of magnification device (surgical microscope, endoscope or magnifying loupes) vs Endodontic therapy performed with a different type of magnification device

Population: Patients who received endodontic therapy and were followed up for at least 4 years after treatment

CD005969 · 6 questions

Outcome	Effect	Evidence	Status / GRADE
Removal of broken (fractured) instruments from the root canal	no estimate extracted	NR	No studies
Repair of root perforations	no estimate extracted	NR	No studies
Quality of visualisation of root canal anatomy and morphology	no estimate extracted	NR	No studies
Total time required to complete the clinical procedure	no estimate extracted	NR	No studies
Quality of root-end filling (retrograde/surgical treatment)	no estimate extracted	NR	No studies
Treatment success (resolution of clinical signs and symptoms with periapical radiographic healing) >=4 years after treatment	no estimate extracted	NR	No studies