Comparison 20. Metapex pulpectomy versus Endoflas pulpectomy.

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Clincal failure	2		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	Subtotals only
1.1 6 months	2	92	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.33 [0.01, 7.58]
2 Radiological failure	2		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	Subtotals only
2.1 6 months	2	92	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	2.02 [0.79, 5.15]
3 Pain	2		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	Subtotals only
3.1 6 months	2	92	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.33 [0.01, 7.58]
4 Soft tissue pathology	2		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	Subtotals only
4.1 6 months	2	92	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.33 [0.01, 7.58]
5 Pathologic mobility	2		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	Subtotals only
5.1 6 months	2	92	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
6 Pathological radiolucency	2		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	Subtotals only
6.1 6 months	2	92	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	2.02 [0.79, 5.15]
7 Pathological root resorption	2		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	Subtotals only
7.1 6 months	2	92	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]