Bardini Giulia, Orrù Cristiano, Ideo Francesca, Nagendrababu Venkateshbabu, Dummer Paul, Cotti Elisabetta
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy.
Department of Preventive and Restorative Dentistry, College of Dental Medicine, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, UAE.
Aust Endod J. 2023 Dec;49(3):769-787. doi: 10.1111/aej.12794. Epub 2023 Sep 13.
This review investigated whether any therapeutic options influenced the outcome of treatment for teeth with external cervical resorption. Out of 870 articles identified by an electronic search, 60 clinical case reports and six case series were included. No randomised clinical trials were found. Risk of bias was assessed using Joanna Briggs Institute's tools. External surgical intervention was the preferred method of accessing the lesions. Removal of resorptive tissue was most often achieved mechanically. Bioactive endodontic cements were the preferred materials for restoring teeth. The outcome measures were based on clinical and radiographic parameters. Of the cases included in the review, no specific treatment approach had a superior outcome in relation to Heithersay's classification. Furthermore, due to the absence of randomised clinical trials, and the low level of evidence associated with case reports/case series, it was not possible to define the optimum clinical treatment for external cervical resorption.
本综述调查了是否有任何治疗方法会影响患有外吸收性牙根颈病变牙齿的治疗结果。在通过电子检索识别出的870篇文章中,纳入了60篇临床病例报告和6个病例系列。未发现随机对照临床试验。使用乔安娜·布里格斯研究所的工具评估偏倚风险。外部手术干预是进入病变部位的首选方法。吸收组织的去除大多通过机械方式实现。生物活性牙髓黏固剂是修复牙齿的首选材料。结果测量基于临床和影像学参数。在本综述纳入的病例中,就海瑟西分类而言,没有特定的治疗方法具有更优的结果。此外,由于缺乏随机对照临床试验,以及与病例报告/病例系列相关的证据水平较低,因此无法确定外吸收性牙根颈病变的最佳临床治疗方法。