Jamal, MohamedKhawaja, Summayah2021-10-122021-10-122020304-2020.16https://repository.mbru.ac.ae/handle/1/529Introduction: This study assessed the opinions on and practice of regenerative endodontic procedures(REPs) among clinicians from different dental specialties. Materials and Methods: After the Institutional Review Board approval, 205 clinicians participated in a web-based survey and were asked about their educational level, professional status, opinion toward REPs, and preferred technique when performing REPs. Results: Although approximately 65% of participants were unsure or did not believe that there is enough evidence to support REPs, 78.2% believed that REPs are a better treatment option than apexification and 70.5% that they could be a future alternative to osseointegrated implants. The results also revealed variability in the preferred techniques to perform REPs, with 40.4% preferring the use of a mixture of antibiotics to disinfect the root canal space, whereas 20.2% preferred calcium hydroxide. Almost 66% were using ≥1 mg/mL of each antibiotic in the mixture, whereas 44.6% were using 0.1 mg/mL. Approximately 40% of participants used techniques that differ from the American Association of Endodontists’ clinical considerations for REPs. Interestingly, attending a continuing dental education course (CDE) significantly reduced the participants’ uncertainty toward REPs and increased their willingness to perform it themselves (P < 0.001). Conclusions: This survey revealed a positive attitude toward and general acceptance of REPs by dentists. It also showed considerable variability in techniques used to perform REPs. Conducting more CDE may increase the awareness of REPs among different dental specialties and reducing variability in techniques.enApexificationRegenerative endodonticsStem cellsTissue engineeringArticle