ABSTRACT
AIMS: This systematic review aimed to compare the efficiency of orifice barriers in preventing coronal microleakage in vitro. METHODS: Articles published in English, German and Chinese were searched for studies describing microleakage assays for the bacterial penetration of root canal-treated teeth in vitro. The final sample included 18 articles for review and meta-analysis. Risk ratios and confidence intervals were determined for dichotomous variables. Ten publications using bacterial leakage models contributed to the meta-analysis. RESULTS: The addition of orifice barriers to a root canal filling was overall effective, shown by risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) demonstrating reduced microleakage with glass ionomer cement (GIC) (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.26-0.53, P < 0.001), resin-modified GIC (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.15-0.67, P = 0.01), composite resin (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.38-0.75, P < 0.001), mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.12-0.52, P < 0.001) and Cavit (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.14-0.39, P < 0.001). There were no significant differences between GIC, resin-modified GIC, composite resin and MTA orifice barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Placement of an orifice barrier over the root canal filling is effective in the prevention of coronal microleakage in vitro. Other parameters may also affect the effectiveness of orifice barriers, including thickness and duration of exposure to the oral environment. © 2023 Australian Dental Association.
