SynthesisPloS one2025
Impact of regenerative procedure on the healing process following surgical root canal treatment: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Analysis and management of the influence of periapical lesion size on endodontic microsurgery].Hua xi kou qiang yi xue za zhi = Huaxi kouqiang yixue zazhi = West China journal of stomatology · 2026Review
- Effect of guided tissue regeneration on the outcome of surgical endodontic treatment: An umbrella review.Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 2025Review
- Persistent Periradicular Lesion Associated With Concurrent Root Fracture and Odontogenic Keratocyst: A Case Report.Clinical case reports · 2025Article
- The tooth transformer® revolution: autologous dentin biomaterials and platelet concentrates in oral regeneration. A parallel narrative systematic review.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDifferent Guided Tissue Regeneration (GTR) procedures, such as membranes, bone substitute materials, and Autologous Platelet Concentrates (APCs), have been applied after surgical root canal treatment (SRCT), which produce different outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of regenerative procedures on the healing process following SRCT.
methodsA comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane, and the Web of Science found Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) published until February 25, 2024. Manual searches were also conducted. Our main outcome was SRCT success or failure after GTR procedures. The Risk Ratio (RR) and failure rate meta-analysis used a fixed effects model with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Subgroup analyses were conducted based on the use of different GTR procedures for varying lesion types in SRCT.
resultsOut of 1,605 records, 16 studies with 690 lesions were included. Overall, GTR procedures significantly improved healing after SRCT in both 2D (RR: 0.50; 95% CI, 0.34-0.73; P < 0.001) and 3D evaluation methods (RR: 0.36; 95% CI, 0.15-0.90; P < 0.001) with no significant difference between the two methods.
conclusionGTR significantly improved SRCT healing regardless of the evaluation method used. Combining collagen membranes with bovine bone-derived hydroxyapatite significantly enhanced the healing process. Additionally, GTR procedures significantly improve healing in through-and-through lesions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.