Endodontic complications in teeth with vital pulps restored with composite resins: a systematic review

Abstract

Composite resin is used extensively for restoration of teeth with vital pulps. Although cell culture studies have disclosed harmful effects on pulpal cells, any untoward clinical effects, manifest as adverse pulpal responses, have yet to be determined. This study comprises a systematic review, designed to address the question of whether the risk of endodontic complications is greater with composite resin restorations than with other restorative materials, such as amalgam. The study methodology involved (i) formulation of the research question, (ii) construction and conduct of an extensive literature search with (iii) interpretation and assessment of the retrieved literature. A search of the medical database PubMed was complemented with a search of the Controlled Trials Register (CENTRAL). The initial search yielded 1043 publications, the abstracts of which were read independently by the authors. After additional searches, 10 studies were included in the review. In all the included studies, the level of evidence was assessed as low. No conclusions could therefore be drawn. The included studies reported few, if any, endodontic complications. Little or no differences emerged between teeth restored with composite resins and those restored with amalgam. To determine whether composite resin restorations of teeth with vital pulps are associated with an increased risk for development of endodontic complications such as apical periodontitis, further evidence is needed, from well-constructed studies with a large number of participants.

Evaluation of stress distribution of a new restorative material and composite resin: a finite-element analysis study

“…This can lead to inflammatory reactions. It can cause pulpal necrosis and subsequently apical periodontitis [25]. In GCC restoration, shrinkage does not occur during the polymerization process.…”

Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta‐analyses for abstracts: best practice for reporting abstracts of systematic reviews in Endodontology

“…). Example 2b : ‘This study comprises a systematic review, designed to address the question of whether the risk of endodontic complications is greater with composite resin restorations than with other restorative materials, such as amalgam’ (Dawson et al . ). Example 2c : ‘The aim of this systematic review and meta‐analysis was to analyse scientific available evidence on the association between diabetes and the presence of radiolucent periapical lesions (RPLs) in root‐filled teeth (RFT)’ (Segura‐Egea et al . ).…”

“…Example 2b: 'This study comprises a systematic review, designed to address the question of whether the risk of endodontic complications is greater with composite resin restorations than with other restorative materials, such as amalgam' (Dawson et al 2015).…”

Apical status and prevalence of endodontic treated teeth among Saudi adults in Eastern province: A prospective radiographic evaluation

“…Therefore, the persistence of AP in endodontically treated teeth after a certain period may be considered a sign of root canal treatment failure. In a systematic review comprising of 10 published studies, they couldn’t get sufficient evidence to figure out the actual cause of endodontic complications and recommended more prospective studies ( Dawson et al, 2015 ).…”