TY - JOUR
T1 - CBCT-Assessed Outcomes and Prognostic Factors of Primary Endodontic Treatment and Retreatment
T2 - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
AU - Brochado Martins, Joāo Filipe
AU - Georgiou, Athina Christina
AU - Nunes, Patrícia Diogo
AU - de Vries, Ralph
AU - Afreixo, Vera Mónica Almeida
AU - da Palma, Paulo Jorge Rocha
AU - Shemesh, Hagay
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2025 The Authors
PY - 2025/6
Y1 - 2025/6
N2 - Introduction: Periapical radiographs have limitations in assessing endodontic treatment outcomes, which can be addressed by cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). This systematic review evaluates primary root canal treatment and retreatment outcomes using CBCT, focusing on periapical healing, success, and prognostic factors. Methods: A literature search (in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science) was performed up to March 8, 2024, in collaboration with a medical information specialist. Three reviewers (J.F.B.M., A.C.G, P.D.N.) independently performed article selection and data extraction. Risk of bias was assessed, and evidence quality using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. Meta-analysis and meta-regression established pooled periapical healing and outcome rates, 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and identify outcome predictors (P < .05). Results: Nineteen studies were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled periapical healing rate using “loose criteria” was 87% (95% CI: 81%–91%) for teeth and 84% (95% CI: 78%–88%) for roots; using “strict criteria” was 36% (95% CI: 22%–53%) for teeth, and 44% (95% CI: 16%–76%) for roots. The weighted pooled success rates for teeth were 85% (95% CI: 80%–89%) under “loose criteria” and 45% (95% CI: 31%–59%) under “strict” criteria. Meta-regression identified outcome predictors include number of visits, irrigant type, tooth type, operator experience, apical preparation size and taper, and obturation technique. Conclusions: CBCT reveals lower success rates under strict criteria compared to loose criteria (36% vs 88%). While CBCT offers greater diagnostic accuracy, its routine use for outcome evaluation may not be necessary, as it yields results similar to periapical radiograph under loose criteria.
AB - Introduction: Periapical radiographs have limitations in assessing endodontic treatment outcomes, which can be addressed by cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). This systematic review evaluates primary root canal treatment and retreatment outcomes using CBCT, focusing on periapical healing, success, and prognostic factors. Methods: A literature search (in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science) was performed up to March 8, 2024, in collaboration with a medical information specialist. Three reviewers (J.F.B.M., A.C.G, P.D.N.) independently performed article selection and data extraction. Risk of bias was assessed, and evidence quality using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. Meta-analysis and meta-regression established pooled periapical healing and outcome rates, 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and identify outcome predictors (P < .05). Results: Nineteen studies were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled periapical healing rate using “loose criteria” was 87% (95% CI: 81%–91%) for teeth and 84% (95% CI: 78%–88%) for roots; using “strict criteria” was 36% (95% CI: 22%–53%) for teeth, and 44% (95% CI: 16%–76%) for roots. The weighted pooled success rates for teeth were 85% (95% CI: 80%–89%) under “loose criteria” and 45% (95% CI: 31%–59%) under “strict” criteria. Meta-regression identified outcome predictors include number of visits, irrigant type, tooth type, operator experience, apical preparation size and taper, and obturation technique. Conclusions: CBCT reveals lower success rates under strict criteria compared to loose criteria (36% vs 88%). While CBCT offers greater diagnostic accuracy, its routine use for outcome evaluation may not be necessary, as it yields results similar to periapical radiograph under loose criteria.
KW - Apical periodontitis
KW - CBCT
KW - endodontics
KW - outcomes
KW - prognostic factors
KW - retreatment
KW - root canal treatment
KW - secondary root canal treatment
KW - success
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=105002737701&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=105002737701&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.joen.2025.03.004
DO - 10.1016/j.joen.2025.03.004
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:105002737701
SN - 0099-2399
VL - 51
SP - 687
EP - 706
JO - Journal of endodontics
JF - Journal of endodontics
IS - 6
ER -