SynthesisAustralian endodontic journal : the journal of the Australian Society of Endodontology Inc2025
Effect of Type of Coronal Restoration on Periapical Healing and Tooth Survival of Root Filled Teeth: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Australian endodontic journal : the journal of the Australian Society of Endodontology Inc, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Improbable healing in endodontics: a case series of favorable outcomes despite adverse prognostic conditions.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Three-Year Apical Outcomes in Teeth with Apical Periodontitis Following Primary Endodontic Treatment or Nonsurgical Retreatment: A Retrospective Clinical Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To evaluate treatment outcomes of directly and indirectly restored root filled teeth (RFT). Electronic databases (MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, Embase) were systematically searched for studies comparing indirect and direct restorations on RFT. Outcomes were tooth survival and periapical healing. Minimum follow-up time was 2 years. The quality of included studies was assessed using GRADE. A total of 2063 articles were screened; eventually, 11 studies were included (Ten cohort studies and one RCT). Ten studies reporting tooth survival and four studies on periapical healing were included in meta-analyses. Overall, RFT restored with indirect coronal restorations survived significantly better compared to directly restored RFT (p = 0.01), whereas no statistical difference in periapical healing was demonstrated (p = 0.72). Indirect restorations appear to be associated with improved survival in RFT, but this finding should be interpreted cautiously. No significant difference in periapical healing was found regardless of restoration type. Trial Registration: International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) ID: CRD42024594890.
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.