Suppr超能文献

引导性牙髓内治疗的临床应用、准确性和局限性:系统评价。

Clinical applications, accuracy and limitations of guided endodontics: a systematic review.

机构信息

OMFS-IMPATH Research Group, Department of Imaging and Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.

Department of Oral Health Sciences, Endodontology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.

出版信息

Int Endod J. 2020 Feb;53(2):214-231. doi: 10.1111/iej.13216. Epub 2019 Oct 23.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The novel concept of guided endodontics has been reported as an effective method to obtain safe and reliable results in root canal treatment.

AIM

To evaluate by means of a systematic review the clinical applications, accuracy and limitations of guided endodontic treatment.

DATA SOURCES

A search of the literature was performed on PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library databases, until 25 April 2019. No language or year restrictions were applied.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Articles that answered the research question, including case reports, in vitro and ex vivo studies were included. Data extraction was performed independently by two reviewers.

STUDY APPRAISAL

Quality assessment was done using STROBE, CARE and Modified CONSORT guidelines for observational, case reports and pre-clinical studies, respectively.

RESULTS

A total of 22 articles, including fifteen case reports, six pre-clinical studies (in vitro and ex vivo studies) and one observational study, were included.

LIMITATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

Even though the level of evidence is low, and the methodology described among studies heterogeneous, all articles describe guided access cavity preparation and guided surgery as being highly accurate and successful techniques when comparing the drilled path to the planned treatment. More studies with a larger number of patients are necessary to obtain significant conclusions.

摘要

背景

引导性牙髓内治疗的新概念已被报道为一种在根管治疗中获得安全可靠结果的有效方法。

目的

通过系统评价评估引导性牙髓内治疗的临床应用、准确性和局限性。

数据来源

对 PubMed、Embase、Web of Science 和 Cochrane Library 数据库进行了文献检索,检索时间截至 2019 年 4 月 25 日。未对语言或年份进行限制。

研究入选标准

包括病例报告、体外和体内研究在内的回答研究问题的文章均被纳入。数据提取由两名评审员独立进行。

研究评估

使用 STROBE、CARE 和改良 CONSORT 指南分别对观察性研究、病例报告和临床前研究进行质量评估。

结果

共纳入 22 篇文章,包括 15 篇病例报告、6 篇临床前研究(体外和体内研究)和 1 篇观察性研究。

局限性和结论

尽管证据水平较低,且研究中描述的方法学存在异质性,但所有文章均描述了引导性预备洞制备和引导性手术是高度准确和成功的技术,当将钻孔路径与计划的治疗进行比较时。需要更多具有更大患者数量的研究来获得有意义的结论。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验