The impact of sealer extrusion on endodontic outcome: A systematic review with meta‐analysis

Abstract

Both authors have contributed significantly and equally and are in agreement with the manuscript. AbstractThe purpose of this systematic review was to qualify and quantify the evidence regarding the effect of extruded sealers on endodontic treatment outcomes. Two reviewers independently conducted a comprehensive literature search. The EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane, PubMed databases, bibliographies, grey literature of all relevant articles and textbooks were searched. Six articles met the inclusion criteria with a moderate risk of bias and were analysed for qualitative and quantitative synthesis. There was moderate-certainty evidence that sealer extrusion can contribute to non-healing outcomes, 95% confidence interval, risk ratio 1.32 (1.12-1.54) and P < 0.05. This indicates that the current authors are somewhat confident the true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect. Sealer extrusion had a 32% higher risk of contributing to a non-healing outcome than no extrusion. However, well-conducted research would need to be conducted to confirm this causality claim. Assessing the quality of the evidenceThe checklist for Meta-analysis Of Observations Studies (MOOSE) was followed, Appendix S1 (16). The Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Form for Cohort

The Assessment of Quality of the Root Canal Filling and the Number of Visits Needed for Completing Primary Root Canal Treatment by Operators with Different Experience

“…It should be emphasized that the small extrusion of a sealer is generally well-tolerated by the periapical tissues [ 49 , 50 , 51 ]. However, some authors found a higher risk of non-healing lesions in cases with sealer extrusion [ 52 , 53 ].…”

Cytocompatibility and bioactive potential of AH Plus Bioceramic Sealer: An in vitro study

“…Endodontic sealers are placed inside the root canal and may extrude to a variable extent during root canal treatment through the apical and/or secondary foramina into the surrounding supporting tissues (Aminoshariae & Kulild, 2020). Therefore, sealers should exhibit an adequate biocompatibility, i.e.…”

Outcomes reporting in systematic reviews on non‐surgical root canal treatment: A scoping review for the development of a core outcome set

“…In total, 149 reviews were eligible for full‐text review, 74 were excluded for various reasons (Table S2). The included studies comprised 75 systematic reviews, of which 40 included meta‐analyses (Table 3); (Abdulrab et al, 2018; Almeida et al, 2017; Alonaizan & AlFawaz, 2019; Aminoshariae et al, 2017; Aminoshariae et al, 2020; Aminoshariae & Kulild, 2015; Aminoshariae & Kulild, 2020; Anagnostaki et al, 2020; Basmadjian‐Charles et al, 2002; Bergenholtz et al, 2013; Bordea et al, 2020; Borges Silva et al, 2017; Borgo Sarmento et al, 2020; Căpută et al, 2019; Chércoles‐Ruiz et al, 2017; Chrepa et al, 2014; Cope et al, 2014; Cope et al, 2018; Cunha et al, 2020; Decurcio et al, 2019; Del Fabbro et al, 2007; Del Fabbro et al, 2016; Del Fabbro et al, 2018; Fedorowicz et al, 2012; Figini et al, 2007; Fransson et al, 2013; Gillen et al, 2011; Gupta et al, 2020; Hou et al, 2017; Iqbal & Kim, 2007; Jamali et al, 2018; Kang et al, 2015; Kojima et al, 2004; Kruse et al, 2015; Leong et al, 2020; Leong & Yap, 2019; Manfredi et al, 2016; Martins et al, 2020; Matthews et al, 2003; Mello et al, 2019; Moreira et al, 2019; Nagendrababu et al, 2019; Nasrabadi et al, 2020; Neelakantan, Ahmed, et al, 2019; Neelakantan et al, 2020; Neelakantan, Herrera, et al, 2019; Ng et al, 2007; Ng et al, 2010; Ng, Mann, & Gulabivala, 2008; Ng, Mann, Rahbaran, et al, 2008; Nixdorf et al, …”