Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37378833›Full record

SynthesisOdontology2023

Postoperative pain after root canal filling with bioceramic sealers: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

Marcelo Augusto Seron, Gabriel Pereira Nunes, Tulio Morandin Ferrisse, Henrico Badaoui Strazzi-Sahyon, Fausto Rodrigo Victorino, Paulo Henrique Dos Santos, João Eduardo Gomes-Filho, Luciano Tavares Angelo Cintra, Gustavo Sivieri-Araujo

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Odontology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Bioceramic versus conventional endodontic sealers: An umbrella review.Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 2026
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Marcelo Augusto SeronSchool of Dentistry, Araçatuba, Department of Preventive and Restorative Dentistry, Araçatuba School of Dentistry, São Paulo State University - UNESP, Rua José Bonifácio 1193, Araçatuba, SP, 1193, Brazil.
Gabriel Pereira NunesSchool of Dentistry, Araçatuba, Department of Preventive and Restorative Dentistry, Araçatuba School of Dentistry, São Paulo State University - UNESP, Rua José Bonifácio 1193, Araçatuba, SP, 1193, Brazil. Gabriel.p.nunes@unesp.br.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7001-967X
Tulio Morandin FerrisseOral Medicine, Department of Diagnosis and Surgery, Araraquara School of Dentistry, São Paulo State University - UNESP, Araraquara, SP, Brazil.
Henrico Badaoui Strazzi-SahyonDepartment of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, Araçatuba School of Dentistry, São Paulo State University - UNESP, Araçatuba, SP, Brazil.
Fausto Rodrigo VictorinoDepartment of Dentistry, Cesumar University Center - UNICESUMAR, Maringá, PR, Brazil.
Paulo Henrique Dos SantosDepartment of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, Araçatuba School of Dentistry, São Paulo State University - UNESP, Araçatuba, SP, Brazil.
João Eduardo Gomes-FilhoSchool of Dentistry, Araçatuba, Department of Preventive and Restorative Dentistry, Araçatuba School of Dentistry, São Paulo State University - UNESP, Rua José Bonifácio 1193, Araçatuba, SP, 1193, Brazil.
Luciano Tavares Angelo CintraSchool of Dentistry, Araçatuba, Department of Preventive and Restorative Dentistry, Araçatuba School of Dentistry, São Paulo State University - UNESP, Rua José Bonifácio 1193, Araçatuba, SP, 1193, Brazil.
Gustavo Sivieri-AraujoSchool of Dentistry, Araçatuba, Department of Preventive and Restorative Dentistry, Araçatuba School of Dentistry, São Paulo State University - UNESP, Rua José Bonifácio 1193, Araçatuba, SP, 1193, Brazil.
Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp) · BRCentro Universitário Cesumar · BRCentro Universitário de Araraquara · BR

Funding

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior Finance Code 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis (SRM) was to assess postoperative pain (PP) after endodontic treatment with bioceramic root canal sealer compared to AH Plus® sealer. This SRM was carried out in accordance with the items on the PRISMA 2020 checklist and Cochrane guidelines and registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021259283). Only randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were included. Meta-analysis was conducted using R software, the standardized means difference (SMD) measure of effect was calculated for quantitative variables, and the odds ratio (OR) for binary variables. The Cochrane tool (RoB 2.0) was used to assess the risk of bias, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the quality of evidence. Qualitative and quantitative analysis included 18 and 17 studies, respectively. For quantitative variables, the bioceramic root canal sealer presented less occurrence of postoperative pain than the AH Plus® sealer in 24 h (SMD - 0.17 [- 0.34; - 0.01], p = 0.0340). For binary variables, there was no difference observed between the sealers evaluated, except for sealer extrusion where the bioceramic group had lower post-filling material extrusion (OR 0.52 [0.32; 0.84], p = 0.007). Regarding the risk of bias analysis, low risk was observed for most domains, except allocation that was considered unclear, while the certainty of evidence ranged from moderate to low. The results showed that bioceramics sealers reduced postoperative endodontic pain only after 24 h and showed less sealer extrusion compared to the AH Plus® sealer. However, more robust and standardized clinical trials are needed to confirm the results with less heterogeneity and higher quality of evidence.

Indexed as

Root Canal Filling MaterialsDental Pulp CavityEpoxy ResinsHumansPostoperative PainRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRoot Canal ObturationEpoxy ResinsRoot Canal Filling MaterialsBioceramic sealersEpoxy resin-based root canal sealerMeta-analysisPostoperative painRoot canal obturation

Identifiers

PMID37378833
OpenAlexW4382344750

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.