ArticleThe Saudi dental journal2021
Pulpal dressing condensation methods in pulpotomy for primary molars: An in-vitro comparative study.
Article in The Saudi dental journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy and safety of diode laser in pulpotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC oral health · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare three condensation techniques of zinc oxide eugenol (ZOE) as a pulpal dressing material during pulpotomy in extracted primary molars. MATERIAL AND
methodsSixty primary first and second molars were embedded in individual wax casts and divided into three groups consisting of 20 teeth each. In group I, the ZOE base was condensed by an amalgam condenser, while a moist cotton pellet was used in group II. A combination of an amalgam condenser and a wet cotton pellet tested the condensation mentod in group III. The condensation quality of the three techniques was evaluated through two digital periapical radiographs taken in a lateral and anterior-posterior direction.
resultsNon-parametric Kruskal-Wallis test showed that there was no significant difference between the technique and quality of ZOE compaction. However, a significant difference was observed on condensation assessment for combined three groups on lateral radiographs vs the appearance on antero-posterior radiographs with the p-value set at < 0.05.
conclusionVoids appeared with all three techniques. A combination of an amalgam condenser and the wet cotton wool pellet was the least effective method of condensation. Lateral radiographs revealed much fewer spaces between the ZOE and pulpal floor in comparison to antero-posterior images.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.