Impact of chronic diseases on the periapical health of endodontically treated teeth: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Systemic diseases affecting the immune system can influence the body's response time to endodontic treatment, potentially necessitating a longer duration for the complete resolution of existing infections when compared to healthy controls. This systematic review aims to evaluate the association between the presence of chronic diseases and periapical status after endodontic treatment through a systematic and comprehensive assessment of existing literature on this topic. The search strategy covered seven electronic databases and grey literature, encompassing articles published until October 2023. Two reviewers independently assessed potentially eligible studies based on the following criteria: Included were studies involving populations exposed to pre-existing chronic diseases who underwent endodontic treatment in permanent teeth. These studies evaluated periapical health status, making comparisons with healthy individuals. There were no language or publication date restrictions. Additionally, two reviewers independently extracted data regarding the characteristics of the included studies. The risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Assessment Checklist. Meta-analysis was conducted using random effects models. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE tool. Twenty-three studies were included in the synthesis. Patients with diabetes were found to have about half the odds of having periapical health compared to non-diabetic patients (OR = 0.46; 95% CI = 0.30-0.70%; I2 = 58%) in teeth that underwent endodontic treatment. On the other hand, other systemic diseases like HIV, cardiovascular disease, and rheumatoid arthritis did not demonstrate significant differences concerning the outcome. In conclusion, diabetic patients showed a lower likelihood of maintaining periapical health. Conversely, patients with HIV, cardiovascular disease, and rheumatoid arthritis did not exhibit significant differences, although the existing evidence is still considered limited. It is crucial to manage these patients in a multidisciplinary manner to provide appropriate care for this population.