06 August 2024 : Meta-Analysis
Quality of Root Canal Fillings and Procedural Errors for In Vivo Studies Prepared in Different Clinical Settings and with Rotary Systems: A Systematic Review
Raid Abdullah Almnea1ADEFG*, Yasser M. Al-Qahtani2BDFG, Abdullatif A. Albinali2CDFG, Abdulrahman Abdullah Aldhbaan2DEFG, Waleed Abdullah Omar3BCG, Raed Hassan Dahman4DEFG, Mishari Mohammed Almalki5BEFG, Ahmad Awadh AlMohy2BCFG, Yahya Hady Yahya Mohammed2BFG, Ahmad Yahya Abdullah Mousa6DEFG, Mohammed M. Al Moaleem
7ABCE
DOI: 10.12659/MSM.945225
Med Sci Monit 2024; 30:e945225
Table 1 Summary of included clinical studies evaluating the quality of root canal treatment.
| Author (s)/year/ country | Canals number/ treatment setting | Teeth type (%) | Root canal filling quality | Overall quality | Procedural errors | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Length (%) | Density (%) | Taper (%) | |||||||||
| Acceptable | Unacceptable | Acceptable | Unacceptable | Acceptable | Unacceptable | Acceptable | Unacceptable | ||||
| Almnea R., 2024/ SA []31 | 224/ Private practice | Molars (100%) | 77.0% | 23.0% | 93.0% | 7.0% | 91.0% | 9.0% | 87.0% | 13.0% | NM |
| Tekin et al, 2023/ Türkiye []10 | 565/ Academic | Anterior (29%)Premolar (21.9%)Molars (44.6%) | 85.7% | 14.3% | 76.2% | 23.8% | NM | NM | 80.6% | 19.4% | Ledge (3.5%);Separated instrument (2.5%);Apical transportation (4.8%) |
| Barroso et al, 2023/ Brazil []21 | 707/ Academic | Anterior (39.9%)Posterior (60.7%) | 67.9% | 32.1% | 77.9% | 22.1% | 74.7% | 25.3% | 73.5% | 26.5% | NM |
| Alshehri et al, 2023/ SA []11 | 278/ Academic | Anterior (100%) | 85.6% | 14.4% | 65.1% | 34.9% | 71.9% | 28.1% | 50.0% | 50.0% | Ledge (4.7%);Root perforation (0.4%);Foramen perforation (0.7%) |
| Ameen et al, 2023/ UAE []22 | 601/ Academic | Anterior (48.4%)Premolar (51.6%) | 93.5% | 6.5% | 96.5% | 3.5% | 98.2% | 1.8% | 87.7% | 12.3% | NM |
| Al Shehadat et al, 2023/ UAE []12 | 480/ Academic | Anterior (32.9%)Premolar (45.6%)Molars (21.5%) | 73.5% | 26.5% | 57.5% | 42.3% | 66.2% | 33.8% | 38.1% | 61.9% | Ledge (5.4%);Apical transportation (3.5%);Separated instrument (1%) |
| Gavini et al, 2022/ Brazil []13 | 2213/ Academic | Anterior (25.8%)Premolar (32.2%)Molars (42.0%) | 72.9% | 27.1% | 87.3% | 22.7% | 91.6% | 8.4% | 62.4% | 37.6 | Separated Instrument: 0.81%.In last 5 mm of apical tip 77.8% |
| Mustafa, 2022/ SA []23 | 400/ Academic | Anterior (36.0%)Premolar (17.0%)Molars (47.0%) | 67.3% | 32.7% | 51.7% | 48.3% | 74.9% | 25.1% | 64.6% | 35.4% | NM |
| Javed et al, 2022/ SA []24 | 653/ Academic | Anterior (38.0%)Premolar (36.5%)Molars (25.5%) | 86.2% | 13.8% | 89.0% | 11.0% | 94.0% | 6.0% | 80.2% | 19.8% | NM |
| Pietrzycka et al, 2022/ Poland []28 | 1733/ Academic & Hospital | Anterior (38.8%)Premolar (25.9%)Molars (35.3%) | 81.5% | 18.5% | 98.0% | 2.0% | NM | NM | 89.7% | 10.3% | NM |
| İnce Yusufoglu et al, 2021/ Türkiye []14 | 3115/ Hospital | Molars (100%) | 79.5% | 20.5% | 49.6% | 50.4% | 58.8% | 41.2% | 41.2% | 58.8% | Separated instrument (3.6%);Ledges (0.4%);Apical perforation (3.7%):Lateral perforation (0.1%) |
| Agwan et al, 2021/ SA []25 | 170/ Academic | Anterior (18.2%)Posterior (81.8%) | 59.5% | 40.5% | 61.5% | 38.5% | 36.0% | 64.0% | 52.3% | 47.6% | NM |
| Fritz et al, 2021/ Brazil []27 | 442/ Academic | Anterior (45.9%)Premolar (54.1%) | 96.6% | 3.4% | 97.0% | 3.0% | NM | NM | 93.8% | 6.2% | NM |
| Laukkanen et al, 2021/ Finland []29 | 426/ Hospital | Anterior (34.2%)Premolar (40.7%)Molars (25.1%) | 57.0% | 43.0% | 61.5% | 38.5% | NM | NM | 67.4%. | 32.6% | NM |
| Patel et al, 2021/ South Africa []26 | NM/ Academic | Anterior (51.2%)Premolar (20.4%)Molars (28.4%) | 68.9% | 31.1% | 73.6% | 26.4% | 70.9% | 29.1% | 62.5% | 37.5% | NM |
| Al-Obaida et al, 2020/ SA []30 | 400/ Hospital | Anterior (28.5%)Premolar (30.7%)Molars (41.0%) | 51.5% | 48.5% | 62.5% | 37.5% | 65.7% | 34.3% | 59.9% | 40.1% | NM |
| SA – Saudi Arabia; UAE – United Arab Emirates; NM – nonmentioned; Max – maxillary; Mand – mandibular. | |||||||||||