This review investigated whether any therapeutic options influenced the outcome of treatment for teeth with external cervical resorption. Out of 870 articles identified by an electronic search, 60 clinical case reports and six case series were included. No randomised clinical trials were found. Risk of bias was assessed using Joanna Briggs Institute's tools. External surgical intervention was the preferred method of accessing the lesions. Removal of resorptive tissue was most often achieved mechanically. Bioactive endodontic cements were the preferred materials for restoring teeth. The outcome measures were based on clinical and radiographic parameters. Of the cases included in the review, no specific treatment approach had a superior outcome in relation to Heithersay's classification. Furthermore, due to the absence of randomised clinical trials, and the low level of evidence associated with case reports/case series, it was not possible to define the optimum clinical treatment for external cervical resorption.
Keywords: clinical approaches; external; invasive cervical resorption; management; review.
© 2023 The Authors. Australian Endodontic Journal published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Australian Society of Endodontology Inc.