Materials for retrograde filling in root canal therapy

Ma, Xiangyu; Li, Chunjie; Jia, Liuhe; Wang, Yan; Liu, Wenwen; Zhou, Xuedong; Johnson, Trevor; Huang, Dingming

doi:10.1002/14651858.cd005517.pub2

Cited by 25 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 66 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Consequently, the adaptation property of a filling material may not be a significant factor affecting clinical outcome, which implies that other clinical factors exist that contribute to controlling intraradicular infection. A recent systematic review that aimed to clarify the clinical effect and safety of different materials for root‐end filling revealed that more high‐quality randomised controlled trials are required to determine the benefits of any one material over another . As no in vivo study was identified in the present systematic review, clinical studies are necessary to obtain information on the relation between the clinical outcome and the adaptation property of root‐end filling materials.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Adaptation of mineral trioxide aggregate to dentine walls compared with other root‐end filling materials: A systematic review

Eren

Parashos

2018

Aust Endodontic J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This systematic review analysed the literature comparing marginal adaptation of mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) with other filling materials in root-end cavities. The PubMed, Ovid, Web of Science, SCOPUS, and Cochrane library databases were searched using appropriate keywords related to root-end filling materials and adaptation. Of 38 articles assessed, 20 met the inclusion criteria. No in vivo study was identified. In 10 studies, MTA gave the best marginal adaptation results, but no significant differences were found between MTA and any of the tested filling materials in seven studies. There was great variability in the study designs including analysed surface, unit of gap measurement and magnification amount during analysis. On the basis of available evidence, MTA presented good marginal adaptation to dentine walls. This review identified the need for the development of standardised methods to evaluate the adaptation property of root-end filling materials in ex vivo studies as well as in clinical studies evaluating outcome.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Adaptation of mineral trioxide aggregate to dentine walls compared with other root‐end filling materials: A systematic review

Eren

Parashos

2018

Aust Endodontic J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The six studies examined five different comparisons, including MTA versus intermediate restorative material (IRM), MTA versus super ethoxybenzoic acid cement (Super‐EBA), Super‐EBA versus IRM, dentine‐bonded resin composite versus glass ionomer cement and glass ionomer cement versus amalgam’ (Ma et al . ). Example 6e : ‘Initially, 109 possibly relevant articles were identified. After screening and full‐text evaluations, 28 articles that met the inclusion criteria were analysed, reporting on a total of 84 patients with altered sensation after extrusion of root canal filling materials’ (Rosen et al .…”

Section: Explanation and Endodontic Examples Of Items In The Prisma Fmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Explanation and Endodontic Examples Of Items In The Prisma Fmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…We also searched Chinese BioMedical Literature Database (in Chinese, 1978 to 20 September 2016) (Ma et al . )’. Example 4d : ‘Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to 15 December 2015), the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2005 to 15 December 2015) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (to 15 December 2015) were searched using included drugs, indications and study designs as search terms’ (Smith et al . ).…”

Section: Explanation and Endodontic Examples Of Items In The Prisma Fmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We also searched Chinese BioMedical Literature Database (in Chinese, 1978 to 20 September 2016) (Ma et al . )’.…”

Section: Explanation and Endodontic Examples Of Items In The Prisma Fmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

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

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An abstract is a brief overview of a scientific, clinical or review manuscript as well as a stand‐alone summary of a conference abstract. Scientists, clinician–scientists and clinicians rely on the summary information provided in the abstracts of systematic reviews to assist in subsequent clinical decision‐making. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) for Abstracts checklist was developed to improve the quality, accuracy and completeness of abstracts associated with systematic reviews and meta‐analyses. The PRISMA for Abstracts checklist provides a framework for authors to follow, which helps them provide in the abstract the key information from the systematic review that is required by stakeholders. The PRISMA for Abstracts checklist contains 12 items (title, objectives, eligibility criteria, information sources, risk of bias, included studies, synthesis of results, description of the effect, strength and limitations, interpretation, funding and systematic review registration) under six sections (title, background, methods, results, discussion, other). The current article highlights the relevance and importance of the items in the PRISMA for Abstracts checklist to the specialty of Endodontology, while offering explanations and specific examples to assist authors when writing abstracts for systematic reviews when reported in manuscripts or submitted to conferences. Strict adherence to the PRISMA for Abstracts checklist by authors, reviewers and journal editors will result in the consistent publication of high‐quality abstracts within Endodontology.

show abstract