DATA SOURCES Sources were Medline and the Cochrane Library. STUDY SELECTION Studies included were in vivo with human subjects, had experimental and control groups, and gave quantitative results in English, German or French. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS Success and failure rates were derived from randomised controlled trials (RCT), clinical controlled trials (CCT), cohort studies (CS) and case-controlled studies (CCS). Qualitative synthesis of results was performed. RESULTS Two RCT, six CCT and 14 CCS were identified. The two RCT suggest that glass ionomer may be more effective than amalgam, conversely one CCT showed amalgam to be more effective. CCTs also suggest that EBA (reinforced zinc oxide eugenol) cement, composite with GLUMA (Bayer AG., Leverkusen, Germany) and gold leaf retrograde filling may be more effective than amalgam. A further CCT suggested that gutta-percha used as a retrograde filing is less effective than when used following an orthograde approach. CONCLUSIONS Based on the outcome of two RCT, glass ionomer appears as effective as amalgam. EBA cement, composite with GLUMA and gold leaf and orthograde gutta-percha may also be as effective as amalgam. Evidence is limited, however, and further research is needed.

中文翻译：

---

研究表明，汞合金的替代品可以作为逆行的根尖切除术填充材料。

数据来源来源是Medline和Cochrane库。研究选择纳入的研究是在人类受试者体内进行的，分为实验组和对照组，并以英语，德语或法语给出了定量结果。数据提取与综合成功和失败率来自随机对照试验（RCT），临床对照试验（CCT），队列研究（CS）和病例对照研究（CCS）。对结果进行定性综合。结果确定了两个RCT，六个CCT和14个CCS。两项RCT提示玻璃离聚物可能比汞齐更有效，相反，一项CCT显示汞齐更有效。CCT还表明，EBA（增强型氧化锌丁香酚）水泥，GLUMA（拜耳公司，德国勒沃库森，德国）复合材料以及金箔逆行填充可能比汞合金更有效。另一项CCT建议，将胶状胶粘剂用作逆行锉刀的效果不及采用正统方法时的效果。结论基于两个RCT的结果，玻璃离聚物似乎和汞齐一样有效。EBA水泥，与GLUMA和金箔的复合材料以及正级胶胶也可能与汞合金一样有效。然而，证据有限，需要进一步的研究。