Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39604933›Full record

SynthesisBMC oral health2024

Comparative assessment of vertical fracture resistance in endodontically treated roots with different obturating systems and techniques: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of in vitro studies.

Guangxiao Li, Ying Li, Jingchen He, Shuyu Liu, Junshu Tang, Taiwei Jiao, Haiyan Sun

Abstract readSystematic ReviewComparative StudyNetwork Meta-Analysis
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC oral health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

7 authors.

Guangxiao Li *Department of Medical Record Management Center, the First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, 110001, China.
Ying Li *Office of Scientific Research Management, School of Public Health, China Medical University, Shenyang, 110122, China.
Jingchen HeDepartment of Endodontics, School of Stomatology, China Medical University, NanjingNorth Street 117, Shenyang, Liaoning, 110002, People's Republic of China.
Shuyu LiuDepartment of Endodontics, School of Stomatology, China Medical University, NanjingNorth Street 117, Shenyang, Liaoning, 110002, People's Republic of China.
Junshu TangDepartment of Endodontics, School of Stomatology, China Medical University, NanjingNorth Street 117, Shenyang, Liaoning, 110002, People's Republic of China.
Taiwei JiaoDepartment of Gastroenterology and Endoscopy, The First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, 110001, China. 20091174@cmu.edu.cn.
Haiyan SunDepartment of Endodontics, School of Stomatology, China Medical University, NanjingNorth Street 117, Shenyang, Liaoning, 110002, People's Republic of China. 13066784163@163.com.

Funding

Natural Science Foundation of Liaoning Province 2022-MS-07
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study conducted a thorough assessment of vertical root fracture (VRF) resistance of endodontically treated teeth filled with various canal-filling systems and techniques through frequentist network meta-analysis (NMA).

methodsA systematic literature search was performed to retrieve relevant publications using PubMed, Embase, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases. The retrieval time range was from Jan 2000 to Sep 2023. The literature selection and data extraction were independently conducted by two investigators. Eligible studies were critically appraised for risk of bias and quality of evidence. Subsequently, we used the 'network' package in Stata/MP 17.0 software to compare the VRF resistance of roots treated with different obturating systems or techniques.

resultsForty-eight trials involving 2724 single-canal roots were included in the NMA. The surface under the cumulative ranking curves indicated that Resilon/Epiphany (80.8%), although outdated, provided the highest VRF resistance among all obturating systems. This was followed by GP/iRootSP (55.5%), GP/MTA-Plus (47.9%), GP/AH-Plus (47.4%), GP/AH-26 (45.9%), and GP/ZOE (12.3%). The roots filled with Resilon/Epiphany showed better VRF resistance as compared to those filled with gutta-percha/AH-Plus (SMD = 0.77, 95%CI 0.10 to 1.45) and gutta-percha/zinc oxide eugenol (SMD = 1.64, 95%CI 0.47 to 2.80). The single cone technique (SCT) group displayed the highest VRF resistance, and roots filled with all techniques, except Thermafil, outperformed the positive control group.

conclusionsResilon/Epiphany demonstrated the greatest root strength among all six obturating systems, followed by GP/iRootSP and GP/MTA-Plus, which are calcium silicate-based systems. In contrast, the gutta-percha/zinc-oxide eugenol system exhibited the weakest performance. All canal-filling techniques, particularly the SCT, strengthen endodontically treated roots, except for the Thermafil technique. Further well-designed clinical trials with large sample sizes are essential for validation.

Indexed as

Root Canal Filling MaterialsRoot Canal ObturationTooth FracturesTooth, NonvitalHumansIn Vitro TechniquesTooth RootRoot Canal Filling MaterialsNetwork meta-analysisObturating materialObturating techniqueRoot canal obturationTooth fracture

Identifiers

PMID39604933
PMCPMC11600742

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.