Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36704087›Full record

ReviewIranian endodontic journal2022

Regenerative Endodontics Success Factors and their Overall Effectiveness: An Umbrella Review.

Wilder J Rojas-Gutiérrez, Eliana Pineda-Vélez, Andrés A Agudelo-Suárez

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Iranian endodontic journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Antibiotic approaches to endodontic regeneration.Biomaterial investigations in dentistry · 2026
    Review
  5. Stress in Immature Incisor Treated With Regenerative Endodontics or Restored With Bulk-Fill Resin Composite: A 2D Finite Element Analysis.Australian endodontic journal : the journal of the Australian Society of Endodontology Inc · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Wilder J Rojas-GutiérrezFaculty of Dentistry, University of Antioquia, Medellín, Colombia.
Eliana Pineda-VélezFaculty of Dentistry, University of Antioquia, Medellín, Colombia.
Andrés A Agudelo-SuárezFaculty of Dentistry, University of Antioquia, Medellín, Colombia.
Universidad de Antioquia · CO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Regenerative endodontics is a developing field of dentistry and aims to recover the physiological and anatomical functions of the tooth for cases of severe dental caries, pulpal pathologies and dental trauma. Materials and Methods: This umbrella review seeks to discover the scientific evidence on the effectiveness and the factors result in successful regenerative endodontic therapies in teeth with necrotic pulps and with incomplete root development. The study was conducted following the PRISMA Guidelines. There were no restrictions regarding search period. A comprehensive literature search was carried out in EMBASE, LILACS, PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, and Google Scholar. A quality evaluation was conducted by using AMSTAR-2. A descriptive analysis of the included systematic reviews and meta-analysis were conducted. Results: Thirteen descriptive systematic reviews and 7 meta-analyses were included. Three articles evidenced low methodological quality according to AMSTAR-2 tool. Overall success rates for the endodontic regeneration procedures ranged from 50% to 98% and the survival rates were between 94% and 100%. Pulp regeneration had a high success rate, evidenced by factors such as the resolution of symptoms, healing, increased root length, dentin thickening and recovery of sensitivity. Follow-up varied from 1 to 48 months for the original studies included in the systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Conclusions: Endodontic practice offers the clinician a good treatment option in case of necrotic pulp with immature roots such as the endodontic regeneration, that is supported by high and moderate quality scientific literature.

Indexed as

ApexificationRegenerative EndodonticsRoot Canal TherapySystematic ReviewUmbrella Review

Identifiers

PMID36704087
PMCPMC9869004
OpenAlexW4318263891

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.