ArticleBDJ open2026
Effectiveness of guided endodontic microsurgery using a trephine bur in critical anatomical regions: a randomized controlled clinical trial.
Article in BDJ open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05283252 (Evaluating the Effectiveness of Guided Endodontic Microsurgery in Critical Anatomical Structures), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Evaluating the Effectiveness of Guided Endodontic Microsurgery in Critical Anatomical Structures (A Randomized Clinical Trial)
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThis randomized controlled clinical trial evaluated the effectiveness of guided endodontic microsurgery (GEMS) compared to conventional endodontic microsurgery (EMS) in critical anatomy regions. MATERIALS AND
methodsTwenty-eight patients (ages 19-58 years) requiring endodontic microsurgery in critical anatomical regions were randomly allocated to guided surgery (n = 14) using 3D-printed surgical guides with trephine burs or conventional microsurgery (n = 14). Primary outcomes included surgical procedure time. Secondary outcomes were periapical lesion size measured by CBCT at 6, 12 months and success rate at 1-year follow-up and complications. statistical analysis employed independent t-tests and chi-square tests.
resultsThe guided group demonstrated significantly shorter surgical time (18.21 ± 3.45 min vs 26.07 ± 4.29 min) (independent t-test, p < 0.001). Complete lesion resolution at 1 year was achieved in 92.9% of guided cases, compared with 71.4% in conventional cases (chi-square, p = 0.139). No complications were observed.
conclusionsGuided endodontic microsurgery using a 3D-printed surgical guide with trephine burs significantly reduces surgical time. The technique demonstrates a clinically relevant trend toward improved healing outcomes, supporting its adoption for complex endodontic surgical cases.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05283252.
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.