Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36016509›Full record

SynthesisInternational endodontic journal2022

Prevalence of root canal treatment worldwide: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

María León-López, Daniel Cabanillas-Balsera, Jenifer Martín-González, Paloma Montero-Miralles, Juan J Saúco-Márquez, Juan J Segura-Egea

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International endodontic journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 57 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
57citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

57 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Observational
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

María León-LópezEndodontic Section, Department of Stomatology, School of Dentistry, University of Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain.
Daniel Cabanillas-BalseraEndodontic Section, Department of Stomatology, School of Dentistry, University of Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain.
Jenifer Martín-GonzálezEndodontic Section, Department of Stomatology, School of Dentistry, University of Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9282-133X
Paloma Montero-MirallesEndodontic Section, Department of Stomatology, School of Dentistry, University of Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain.
Juan J Saúco-MárquezEndodontic Section, Department of Stomatology, School of Dentistry, University of Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain.
Juan J Segura-EgeaEndodontic Section, Department of Stomatology, School of Dentistry, University of Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0427-9059

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe prevalence of root filled teeth (RFT) worldwide will inform about the amount of clinical activity of dentists dedicated to treat endodontic disease.

objectivesTo carry out a systematic review with meta-analysis answering the following question: What is the prevalence of RFT around the world? The percentage of people with at least one RFT was also investigated.

methodsA systematic review including population-based studies using the following databases: PubMed, EMBASE and Scielo. Studies related to prevalence of RFT were included. The outcome of interest of the study was the prevalence of RFT. The meta-analyses were calculated with the Open Meta Analyst software to determine the global prevalence of RFT. Subgroups analyses were performed comparing geographical distribution, radiographic method and year of the study (classified in 20th or 21th century). The prevalence of people with at least one RFT was also analysed.

resultsSeventy-four population-based studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Twenty-eight, forty-four and two studies reported high, moderate and low risk of bias, respectively. No obvious publication bias was observed. Prevalence of RFT was estimated with 1 201 255 teeth and 32 162 patients. The calculated worldwide prevalence of RFT was 8.2% (95% CI = 7.3%-9.1%; p < .001). The global prevalence of people with at least one RFT was 55.7% (95% CI = 49.6%-61.8%; p < .001). In 20th century, the prevalence of RFT was 10.2% (95% CI = 7.9%-12.5%; p < .001), whereas in the 21st century the overall calculated prevalence of RFT was 7.5% (95% CI = 6.5%-8.6%; p < .001). Brazilian people (12%) and the European population (9.3%) showed the highest prevalence of RFT. In Europe, 59.6% (95% CI = 52.4%-66.8%) of people has at least one RFT.

conclusionsThis review showed that root canal treatment is a very common therapy throughout the world. More than half of the studied population have at least one RFT. A limitation of the present study is that most of the studies did not consider random sampling for population selection. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO Systematic review registration number: (CRD42022329053).

Indexed as

Dental Pulp CavityDental Pulp DiseasesHumansPrevalenceRoot Canal ObturationRoot Canal Therapyepidemiologypopulation-based studyprevalenceroot canal treatmentroot filled teethsurvey

Identifiers

PMID36016509
PMCPMC9826350

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.