Abstract:Background Limited evidence is available regarding the superior clinical properties of bioceramic sealers comparted with traditional standard sealers. Objectives This review aimed to answer the following research questions: 'In healthy patients requiring a root canal treatment (P), what is the efficacy of premixed bioceramic sealers (I) compared with traditional root canal epoxy resin‐based sealers (C) in terms of survival, success rates (PICO1) sealer extrusion and resorption (PICO2) post‐obturation pain (PICO3) (O)?' Methods Authors independently searched three electronic databases: PubMed (including MEDLINE), Web of Science, Embase and Scopus up to 31 October 2023. This was accompanied by both grey literature and manual search. Detailed selection criteria were applied, namely mature permanent teeth requiring root canal treatment, premixed bioceramic sealer with gutta‐percha as an intervention group, a standard filling technique as control group and full‐text available in English. A random‐effect meta‐analysis was used to synthesize the body of evidence regarding the use of bioceramic sealers in root canal treatment and their impact on post‐obturation pain. Effect sizes were represented as relative risks on a logarithmic scale for binary outcomes and as mean differences for continuous outcomes. Results A total of 941 articles were identified. Fifteen Comparative clinical studies were finally included. Eleven were randomized clinical trials, and four were prospective clinical trials with control group. The follow‐up of these studies was not greater than 2 years. No publication bias was observed in any study. No significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of survival and success rates. A small non‐significant lower risk of extrusion was observed for bioceramics. A small, non‐significantly lower post‐operative‐pain within 24‐h was observed when bioceramics were used. Discussion The majority of current evidence shows inconsistencies in reporting and is of short‐term duration. Robust prospective long‐term trials are needed in this area to better support future recommendations. Conclusion This systematic review is the first to analyse several clinical outcomes using premixed sealers. Included studies differed in terms of clinical protocol and operator expertise, but reported a similar outcome when comparing bioceramic versus standard sealers. Tooth survival, treatment outcome, post‐operative pain and periapical extrusion were similar and presented no significant differences between the two sealer types. Registration PROSPERO database (CRD42023449151).

Outcome of Root Canal Treatment Using Warm Vertical Compaction with Bioceramic and Resin-Based Sealers: A Randomised Clinical Trial.

Outcome of Root Canal Treatments Using a New Calcium Silicate Root Canal Sealer: A Non-Randomized Clinical Trial

Clinical outcome of non-surgical root canal treatment using different sealers and techniques of obturation in 237 patients: A retrospective study

Clinical outcome of bioceramic sealer iRoot SP extrusion in root canal treatment: a retrospective analysis

In Vitro Study of Dentinal Tubule Penetration and Filling Quality of Bioceramic Sealer

Evaluation of sealing ability of four bioceramic root canal sealers and an epoxy resin-based sealer: An in vivo study

Evaluation of Sealer Remnants Using a Bioceramic Sealer Single-cone Technique after Post Space Preparation and Its Influence on the Adhesion of Fibre Posts in Vitro.

Comparative evaluation of postoperative pain after root canal obturation using resin-based sealer (AH plus) and bioceramic sealer (IROOT SP) in adult mandibular molars: A double blinded randomized controlled trial

The efficacy of premixed bioceramic sealers versus standard sealers on root canal treatment outcome, extrusion rate and post‐obturation pain: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Comparison of sealing ability of bioceramic sealer, AH plus, and guttaflow in conservatively prepared curved root canals obturated with single-cone technique: An In vitro study

Comparative Evaluation of the Sealing Ability of a BioCeramic Sealer (iRoot SP) with AH Plus Sealer with Root Canal Dentin Using Three Different Techniques of Sealer Application: A Combined Dye Extraction and Scanning Electron Microscope Study

In vitro evaluation of the impact of a bioceramic root canal sealer on the mechanical properties of tooth roots

Comparison of apical sealing ability of bioceramic sealer and epoxy resin-based sealer using the fluid filtration technique and scanning electron microscopy

Clinical study on the effects of different root canal sealers in single visit root canal treatment

Comparison between AH plus sealer and total fill bioceramic sealer performance in previously untreated and retreatment cases of maxillary incisors with large-sized periapical lesion: a randomized controlled trial

Outcomes and prognostic factors of endodontically treated teeth filled with calcium silicate‐ or epoxy resin‐based root canal sealers: A retrospective cohort study

Evaluation of the Sealing Ability and Bond Strength of Two Endodontic Root Canal Sealers: An In Vitro Study

Comparison of apical sealing ability between bioceramic and zinc oxide eugenol-based sealer during root canal treatment, in vitro

Clinical outcomes of nonsurgical root canal treatment using NeoSealer Flo and Endosequence BC Sealer: A retrospective analysis with short-term follow-up

Study on the Sealing Ability of Biological Root Canal Sealer Iroot SP in Root Canal Filling

Comparison sealing ability in three bioceramic sealers applied in hydraulic condensation technique by using micro-computed tomography