Conclusions : The probability for success for EMS proved to be significantly greater than the probability for success for RES , providing best available evidence on the influence of cavity preparation with ultrasonic tips and /or SuperEBA ( Keystone Industries , Gibbstown , NJ ) , IRM ( Dentsply Sirona , York , PA ) , MTA , or silicate cements as root‐end filling material instead of a shallow cavity preparation and placement of a resin‐based material .
HIGHLIGHTSEndodontic microsurgery ( EMS ) with the use of high‐magnification ultrasonic root‐end preparation and root‐end filling with SuperEBA , IRM , MTA , or other calcium silicate cements has a high probability of success .
Resin‐based endodontic surgery with the use of high‐magnification preparation of a shallow concave root‐end cavity with bonded resin‐based root‐end filling material performed less favorably than EMS
Introduction : The aim of the present study was to investigate the influence of root‐end preparation and filling material on endodontic surgery outcome .
Endodontic surgery with ultrasonic retrotips: one-year follow-up.
OBJECTIVE The purpose of this prospect i ve clinical study was to monitor the outcome of ultrasonic root-end preparation , in relation to tooth type and location , presence of post restoration and type of retrotip . STUDY DESIGN Teeth treated surgically showed a periradicular lesion of strictly endodontic origin . Fifty teeth were included in the study , according to specific selection criteria . Cases were followed for a period of 1 year and then classified in 3 groups ( success , uncertain healing , and failure ) according to radiographic and clinical criteria . RESULTS Of the 46 teeth evaluated at 1-year follow-up , 42 teeth ( 91.3 % ) successfully healed , 1 tooth had uncertain healing , and 3 failed . We found no statistically significant differences in treatment results related to the type of tooth , tooth location , post restoration , and type of retrotip .  CONCLUSION Adherence to a strict endodontic surgical protocol and the use of contemporary techniques and material s can lead to a predictable outcome
Conclusions : The probability for success for EMS proved to be significantly greater than the probability for success for RES , providing best available evidence on the influence of cavity preparation with ultrasonic tips and /or SuperEBA ( Keystone Industries , Gibbstown , NJ ) , IRM ( Dentsply Sirona , York , PA ) , MTA , or silicate cements as root‐end filling material instead of a shallow cavity preparation and placement of a resin‐based material .
HIGHLIGHTSEndodontic microsurgery ( EMS ) with the use of high‐magnification ultrasonic root‐end preparation and root‐end filling with SuperEBA , IRM , MTA , or other calcium silicate cements has a high probability of success .
Resin‐based endodontic surgery with the use of high‐magnification preparation of a shallow concave root‐end cavity with bonded resin‐based root‐end filling material performed less favorably than EMS
Introduction : The aim of the present study was to investigate the influence of root‐end preparation and filling material on endodontic surgery outcome .