RESUMO
AIM: Selective root-canal retreatment has been proposed as an alternative to full retreatment in multirooted, root-canal-filled teeth with evidence of apical pathology, where only the affected root(s) is retreated. Whilst this option may save costs initially, failures and retreatments may compensate for these initial savings. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of full versus selective root-canal retreatment using data from a recent clinical pilot study, employing a modelling approach. METHODOLOGY: A Markov model was constructed to follow up a previously root-canal treated maxillary molar with apical pathology on a single root (mesio-buccal), receiving either selective or full root-canal retreatment. A private-payer perspective in Dutch health care was adopted. Permanent molar teeth with apical lesions on the mesial root were simulated over the lifetime of initially 50-year-old patients. Teeth could have endodontic complications and require interventions such as retreatment or tooth extraction and replacement. Costs were calculated based on the Dutch dental fee catalogues. Monte-Carlo microsimulations were performed to assess lifetime costs and effectiveness (measured as tooth retention time), and the resulting cost-effectiveness. Probabilistic joint uncertainty and sensitivity analyses were performed, and cost-effectiveness at different willingness-to-pay-thresholds was evaluated. RESULTS: In the base-case scenario, selective retreatment was less costly (2137; 2.5%-97.5% percentiles: 1944-2340 Euro) and more effective (19.6; 18.3-20.8 Years) than full retreatment (2495; 2305-2671 Euro; 16.5; 15.2-17.9 Years) in 100% of the simulations and regardless of the willingness-to-pay threshold. Only in a worst case scenario was selective retreatment more costly, but remained more effective. CONCLUSIONS: Selective retreatment, when clinically applicable, is likely to be more cost-effective than full retreatment in endodontically treated molars with persistent apical periodontitis. Our results should be interpreted with caution because the quality of the underlying data is limited.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To assess the potential of ultrasound examination (USE) as an adjunctive method to conventional radiology to evaluate the healing processes occurring after the treatment of bone lesions of the jaws. The research question was: what is the effectiveness of USE to evaluate the healing of intra-osseous bone lesions when compared to radiological or clinical examination? MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six databases (PubMed, the Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Best Evidence) were searched from their inception (PROSPERO CRD42019134482). A quality assessment was performed combining the Downs and Black tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. The risk of bias was calculated using the Cochrane collaboration tool to assess the risk of bias. RESULTS: A total of 4404 records were screened, and 7 studies meeting the inclusion criteria were included in the systematic review. USE allowed to evaluate the healing of jaw bone lesions by assessing their reduction in size, the increase in echogenicity of the affected area, and the progressive decrease\disappearance of the vascular flow signal within the lesions. CONCLUSIONS: USE implemented with color power Doppler is an advanced imaging technique feasible to monitor the early and long-term response of the intra-osseous lesions of the jaws to both surgical and nonsurgical treatment. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This systematic review brought evidence that USE can constitute a safe alternative imaging technique in the dental clinical practice for the management of central lesions of the maxillary bones.
