How Do We View 'New' in Endodontics? Balancing Innovation with Evidence
A very recent publication https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/dental-medicine/articles/10.3389/fdmed.2026.1851537/full has sparked debate amongst the endodontic community regarding the potential clinical performance of modern endodontic sealers.
The rapidly developing field of bio-ceramic use in endodontics has seen a large upsurge in the availability of new sealer materials hit the marketplace. Whilst innovation is undoubtedly key to improving patient outcomes long term, are we as clinicians making ourselves aware of the potential pitfalls? Concerns around sealer stability have been well documented in recent years, and it would seem that this debate looks set to continue.
Whilst this blog post is not to discuss bio-ceramic sealers per se, it may serve as an opportunity for reflection. Clinicians may now be more overloaded than ever with new materials and techniques often promoted heavily on news feeds of social media channels. It may be the case that clinicians are provided with materials to use by a practice, without their individual choice or input. Are these materials chosen on the basis of a strong evidence base and long-term clinical studies, or are the materials chosen due to economic market forces? Are clinicians providing their own materials on a self-funded basis, and have these materials (or techniques) been rigorously tested and researched?
Clinicians are now expected to deliver more predictable clinical outcomes than ever before. It may be wise for dentists to take the time to sit back and consider exactly what materials and techniques they are using, and if they are appropriate for the treatment and outcome expected. Balancing the fervour and enthusiasm for the next big ‘thing’ against caution and self-guided research may be a wise position to adopt. If we are ever called upon to justify our clinical approach, then we can have confidence in doing so. Being too far ahead of the curve may be an uncomfortable place to find oneself if a claim or GDC referral were to arise.
From a patient perspective, transparency and informed consent are essential. Patients often assume that all dental materials and techniques have been tested extensively over many decades. While many new techniques and materials are rigorously tested, it may not always be the case that the testing employed is reflective against long-term clinical outcomes. Clinicians should therefore remain informed about emerging research and communicate both the potential benefits and limitations of newer materials and techniques where appropriate.
Ultimately, innovation drives progress in dentistry, and modern materials and techniques have the potential to improve treatment success and patient outcomes. However, as with any new technology, careful evaluation and long-term surveillance remain crucial. By balancing enthusiasm for innovation with evidence-based practice, dental professionals can ensure that patient safety remains at the forefront of their clinical care for years to come.
Follow us on:
