SynthesisActa odontologica Scandinavica2025
Impact of fixed appliance treatment on root resorption in root canal-treated teeth: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Acta odontologica Scandinavica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The Effect of Clear Aligners on Root Length in Endodontically Treated Teeth: A Systematic Review of Split-Mouth Studies.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe relationship between orthodontic treatment and root resorption in endodontically treated teeth remains controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effects of fixed appliance treatment on root resorption in root canal-treated teeth compared to vital teeth.
methodsA comprehensive literature search was conducted across multiple databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Sinomed, CNKI, and Wanfang. Studies comparing root resorption between root canal-treated teeth and vital teeth during orthodontic treatment were included. The methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Standardized mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using random-effects models.
resultsTen studies involving 266 patients met the inclusion criteria. The overall effect showed no significant difference in root resorption between root canal-treated teeth and vital teeth (SMD = -0.08, 95% CI: -0.24 to 0.08, I² = 7.0%). Subgroup analyses revealed no significant differences based on measurement methods, extraction versus non-extraction treatment, or tooth position. However, extraction cases demonstrated a numerical trend toward greater root resorption in root canal-treated teeth (SMD = -0.70, 95% CI: -1.50 to 0.11, I² = 67.1%, p = 0.048), while the non-extraction group showed no meaningful differences (SMD = -0.07, 95% CI: -0.42 to 0.28, I² = 49.2%, p = 0.096).
conclusionsThis meta-analysis suggests that root canal-treated teeth do not show significantly different root resorption patterns compared to vital teeth during orthodontic treatment. However, extraction cases may require careful monitoring due to a tendency toward increased root resorption.
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.