Affiliations 

  • 1 Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
  • 2 Division of Clinical Dentistry, School of Dentistry, International Medical University, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
  • 3 School of Dentistry, College of Biomedical and Life Sciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
Aust Endod J, 2023 Sep 13.
PMID: 37702252 DOI: 10.1111/aej.12794

Abstract

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 prevalently 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 to 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.

* Title and MeSH Headings from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.