UCLA School of Dentistry, Los Angeles, California 90095-1668, USA.
J Endod. 2012 Sep;38(9):1170-6. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2012.05.023.
Cross-sectional studies describe the health status of a population and measure the prevalence of disease or treatment. Neither the prevalence of periapical radiolucency, a surrogate for disease, nor the prevalence of root canal treatment have been subjected to a systematic review, which is the highest level of clinical evidence. The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalence of periapical radiolucency and nonsurgical root canal treatment.
Inclusion/exclusion criteria were used for defined searches in MEDLINE and EMBASE. Title lists were scanned and abstracts were read to determine utility. Articles meeting the inclusion/exclusion criteria were analyzed for heterogeneity. Weighted mean percentages were calculated for the prevalence of overall periapical radiolucency, root canal treatment, and apical radiolucency in both treated and untreated teeth.
Defined searching produced 11,491 titles. Thirty-three articles were included. Most patient samples represented modern populations from countries with high or very high human development indices. Meta-analysis was performed on 300,861 teeth. Of these, 5% had periapical radiolucencies, and 10% were endodontically treated. Of the 28,881 endodontically treated teeth, 36% had periapical radiolucencies; however, cross-sectional studies cannot distinguish between healing and failing cases. Of the 271,980 untreated teeth, 2% had periapical radiolucencies. The technical quality of root canal treatment was decried by most authors of the included studies.
The prevalence of periapical radiolucency was very high, broadly equivalent to 1 radiolucency per patient. The prevalence of teeth with root canal treatment was very high, broadly equivalent to 2 treatments per patient. Billions of teeth are retained through root canal treatment.
横断面研究描述了人群的健康状况，并测量了疾病或治疗的患病率。根尖周透光区的患病率（疾病的替代指标）和根管治疗的患病率均未进行系统评价，而系统评价是临床证据的最高级别。本研究旨在对根尖周透光区和非手术根管治疗的患病率进行系统评价和荟萃分析。
使用 MEDLINE 和 EMBASE 中的定义搜索标准进行纳入/排除标准搜索。扫描标题列表并阅读摘要以确定其是否有用。符合纳入/排除标准的文章分析了异质性。对总体根尖周透光区、治疗和未治疗牙齿的根管治疗以及根尖周透光区的患病率计算加权平均百分比。
定义搜索产生了 11491 个标题。共纳入 33 篇文章。大多数患者样本代表了来自人类发展指数较高或极高的国家的现代人群。对 300861 颗牙齿进行了荟萃分析。其中，5%有根尖周透光区，10%接受了根管治疗。在 28881 颗接受根管治疗的牙齿中，有 36%有根尖周透光区；然而，横断面研究无法区分愈合和失败病例。在 271980 颗未治疗的牙齿中，有 2%有根尖周透光区。纳入研究的大多数作者都谴责根管治疗的技术质量。
根尖周透光区的患病率非常高，大致相当于每位患者有 1 个透光区。接受根管治疗的牙齿的患病率非常高，大致相当于每位患者有 2 次治疗。通过根管治疗保留了数十亿颗牙齿。
