SynthesisBMC oral health2021
The effect of retrograde material type and surgical techniques on the success rate of surgical endodontic retreatment: systematic review of prospective randomized clinical trials.
Synthesis in BMC oral health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Intentional Replantation - Small procedure, big benefits: A report of five cases.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2026Article
- Long-term outcomes and prognostic factors in endodontic surgery: a retrospective cohort study.BMC oral health · 2026Observational
- Marginal Adaptability of Harvard MTA and Biodentine Used as Root-End Filling Material: A Comparative SEM Study.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Impact of different capping materials extracts on proliferation and osteogenic differentiation of cultured human dental pulp stem cells.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Intramedullary bone tissue reaction of ion-releasing resin-modified glass-ionomer restoration versus two calcium silicate-based cements: an animal study.Scientific reports · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEndodontic surgical procedures, when performed, require retrograde filling materials that are biocompatible, non-toxic, non-irritant, dimensionally stable, and ideally promote bone formation. Precise evaluation of retrograde filling materials in clinical trials is necessary to give holistic view for properties of material and potential outcome from its use. The purpose of this review is to evaluate the effect of retrograde material type and surgical techniques on the success rate of surgical endodontic retreatment.
methodsAn electronic search was performed in the time frame between 1st of January 2000 to 1st of September 2020 using database. Sources Web of Science, PubMed and redundant hand searches through their references. Seven inclusion-exclusion criteria were set for the selection and identification of relevant articles. Risk of bias was conducted for the included studies.
resultsNine randomized clinical trials (RCTs) fulfilled the inclusion criteria for this systematic review. The outcome of this review revealed that none of the reviewed trials totally-fulfilled CONSORT 2010 criteria.
conclusionsIn light of the outcome of this review, there is no enough evidence to support the superiority of certain retrograde filling material or surgical technique over another in the success rate of surgical endodontics retreatment. The variety of methodologies and strategies, such as patient selection, the method of treatment and study analysis, led to doubtful credibility of the obtained clinical evidence. Further prospective randomized controlled clinical trials evaluating the specific effect of the various used materials are needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.