Trial reportJournal of applied oral science : revista FOB2022
Comparison between the rotary (Hyflex EDM®) and manual (k-file) technique for instrumentation of primary molars: a 12-month randomized clinical follow-up study.
Trial report in Journal of applied oral science : revista FOB, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Different outcomes of rotary and manual instrumentation in primary teeth pulpectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2025Pooled it
- Trial
- Clinical and radiographic outcomes of pulpectomy in primary teeth using two rotary file systems compared with manual files: a cost-effectiveness analysis.BMC oral health · 2025Trial
- Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesRotational instrumentation is an alternative for the clinical practice of pediatric dentists. However, there are few records in the literature on the clinical and radiographic aspects of treated teeth over time. Compare instrumentation time and filling quality between manual (k-file) and rotary (Hyflex EDM®) files, and clinically and radiographically follow-up the treated teeth for 12 months. Moreover, the characteristics of glass ionomer restorations and their interference in the treatment prognosis over time were evaluated. METHODOLOGY: In total, 40 children with pulp involvement in primary molars received treatment with Hyflex EDM® or manual rotary files, performed by an operator. Clinical and radiographic aspects were observed at different times to determine the effectiveness of each technique.
resultsThe rotary system reduced instrumentation time when compared to the use of manual files (p≤0.05), but there was no difference in filling quality between the groups (p≥0.05). Moreover, both types of instrumentation were effective for 12 months (p≥0.05), and restoration retention influenced the emergence of periapical lesions (p≤0.05).
conclusionAlthough rotary files reduce clinical time, the clinical and radiographic aspects of both techniques were similar over 12 months. Moreover, restoration retention has been shown to be related to treatment prognosis.
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.