ReviewThe Saudi dental journal2026
Role of cone-beam computed tomography in predicting root canal treatment success: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in The Saudi dental journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Root canal treatment (RCT) is an essential dental procedure aimed at preserving natural teeth by eliminating infected pulp and preventing reinfection. Predicting RCT success remains a clinical challenge due to anatomical complexities and diagnostic limitations of traditional 2D imaging. Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) offers three-dimensional visualization, potentially enhancing diagnostic accuracy and prognostic evaluation. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the role of CBCT in predicting the success of RCT by identifying anatomical and pathological factors that influence treatment outcomes. This review is the first to separately synthesize diagnostic accuracy and prognostic evidence for CBCT in predicting non-surgical RCT outcomes using subgroup analyses of voxel size and follow-up duration. Following PRISMA guidelines, electronic databases including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase were searched for relevant studies published between 2013 and 2024. Studies were categorized as (1) diagnostic accuracy studies or (2) prognostic studies assessing whether CBCT-identified variables predicted RCT success/failure. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed using appropriate critical appraisal tools. Meta-analysis was conducted to determine pooled effect sizes for periapical lesion detection, root fracture identification, and canal configuration assessment. Twelve studies (6 diagnostic accuracy; 6 prognostic outcome) involving various designs and sample sizes were included. Meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies showed pooled sensitivity/specificity of 0.88/0.84 for periapical lesions (I
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.