title: Magnification devices for endodontic therapy.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  After the introduction of microsurgical principles in endodontics involving new techniques for root canal treatment, there has been a drive to enhance the visualisation of the surgical field. It is important to know if the technical advantages for the operator brought in by magnification devices such as surgical microscopes, endoscopes and magnifying loupes, are also associated with advantages for the patient in terms of improvement of clinical and radiographic outcomes. This version updates the review published in 2009.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  To evaluate and compare the effects of endodontic treatment performed with the aid of magnification devices versus endodontic treatment without magnification devices. We also aimed to compare the different magnification devices used in endodontics with one another.
  
  
  METHODS
  The following electronic databases were searched: the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register (to 13 October 2015), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, 2015, Issue 9), MEDLINE via OVID (1946 to 13 October 2015) and EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 13 October 2015). We searched the US National Institutes of Health Trials Register (http://clinicaltrials.gov) and the WHO Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases.
  
  
  METHODS
  We considered all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing endodontic therapy performed with versus without one or more magnification devices, as well as randomised and quasi-randomised trials comparing two or more magnification devices used as an adjunct to endodontic therapy.
  
  
  METHODS
  We conducted screening of search results independently and in duplicate. We obtained full papers for potentially relevant trials. The Cochrane Collaboration statistical guidelines were to be followed for data synthesis.
  
  
  RESULTS
  No trials met the inclusion criteria for this review.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  No article was identified in the current literature that satisfied the criteria for inclusion. It is unknown if and how the type of magnification device affects the treatment outcome, considering the high number of factors that may have a significant impact on the success of endodontic surgical procedure. This should be investigated by further long-term, well-designed RCTs that conform to the CONSORT statement (www.consort-statement.org/).
authors.affiliation: Department of Biomedical, Surgical and Dental Sciences, Università degli Studi di Milano, IRCCS Galeazzi Orthopaedic Institute, Via Riccardo Galeazzi 4, Milan, Italy, 20161.
authors.forename: Massimo
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Del Fabbro
authors.forename: Silvio
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Taschieri
authors.forename: Giovanni
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Lodi
authors.forename: Giuseppe
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Banfi
authors.forename: Roberto L
authors.initials: RL
authors.lastname: Weinstein
mesh_terms: D004708:Endodontics / Q000295:instrumentation* / Q000379:methods; D019723:Endoscopes; D006801:Humans; D007909:Lenses; D008853:Microscopy / Q000295:instrumentation; D012390:Root Canal Therapy / Q000295:instrumentation* / Q000379:methods