2021
DOI: 10.1111/aej.12503
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Contribution of XP‐Endo files to the root canal filling removal: A systematic review and meta‐analysis ofin vitrostudies

Abstract: This review was designed to analyse whether the supplementary use of XP-Endo Finisher and XP-Endo Finisher R contributes to the removal of root canal filling materials. Databases were searched up to November 2020. Studies were critically assessed according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. Risk of bias evaluation was performed. Pooled standardised mean differences (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated. Ten studies involving 192 teeth were eligible for systematic review and meta-analysi… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
19
0
3

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 54 publications
(258 reference statements)
1
19
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…The present findings corroborate those found by a systematic review[ 2 ] and a meta-analysis[ 25 ] recently performed, i.e., no currently available technique is capable to render the root canals completely free from root canal filling materials. As long as the abiding of contaminated root canal filling materials compromises the prognosis of endodontic retreatment, the search for even more effective cleaning strategies or techniques must go on.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…The present findings corroborate those found by a systematic review[ 2 ] and a meta-analysis[ 25 ] recently performed, i.e., no currently available technique is capable to render the root canals completely free from root canal filling materials. As long as the abiding of contaminated root canal filling materials compromises the prognosis of endodontic retreatment, the search for even more effective cleaning strategies or techniques must go on.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…In addition, the degree of curvature was selected (Estrela et al, 2008). This enabled careful selection of homogenous samples to form anatomically balanced experimental groups and reduce the risk of bias (De-Deus et al, 2020;Uzunoglu-Özyürek et al, 2021). Considering the importance of defining the sample characteristics to enable correct evaluation of the behaviour of heat-treated instruments during root canal preparation, and to ensure interpretation of their behavioural data in cases of instruments used in root canals with moderate and severe curvature, the factors considered in the analysis, for these purposes, were the two-(area, perimeter, roundness, largest diameter and smallest diameter) and three-dimensional (volume, surface area and 3D geometry -SMI) values (De-Deus et al, 2020;Filizola de Oliveira et al, 2019;Sousa-Neto et al, 2018).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…With the purpose of standardizing the samples to reduce the risk of bias, anatomically balanced experimental groups were stablished by determining homogeneous three-dimensional parameters of volume and surface area (De-Deus et al, 2020;Uzunoglu-Özyürek et al, 2021). Before beginning with the experimental procedures, the normality (Shapiro-Wilk test) and homoscedasticity (Levene test) of the variables were verified.…”
Section: Sample Selectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Regarding the methodology, it is noteworthy that in the present study, a careful selection of the samples was performed based on cone beam computed tomography images, in which, through the evaluation of two‐dimensional parameters of larger and smaller diameter, teeth with long oval cross‐section were selected, which was determined by the ratio between the largest and smallest diameters ≥2.5 (Pereira et al, 2017) in order to create homogeneous and anatomically balanced experimental groups and reduce the risk of bias (De‐Deus et al, 2020; Uzunoglu‐Özyürek, Küçükkaya Eren, & Karahan, 2021).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%