ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2022
The Efficiency of the BTR-Pen System in Removing Different Types of Broken Instruments from Root Canals and Its Effect on the Fracture Resistance of Roots.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of different methods for separated file retrieval from the apical third of curved root canals:Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 2026Article
- Comparison of the ultrasonic, Masserann, and BTR-pen techniques for removing fractured instruments with dental microscope: a CBCT-based in vitro study.Acta odontologica Scandinavica · 2026Article
- Efficiency of ultrasonic retrieval for separated instruments within the middle third of root canals using modified staging platform: a comparative in-vitro study.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Secondary retrieval and complication management for failed separated instrument removal in the apical third in curved root canals: a case series.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Effects of different platform preparation and retrieval techniques on broken file removal and fracture strength.Brazilian oral research · 2026Article
- Novel electromagnetic device to retrieve fractured stainless steel endodontic files: an in-vitro investigation.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Quantitative analysis of troughing depth for successful instrument retrieval using the loop technique: A cross-sectionalJournal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 2025Article
- Finite element analysis of stress in mandibular molars repaired after fractured instrument removal.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Comparison of the pull-out force of different microtube-based methods in fractured endodontic instrument removal: An in-vitro study.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Management of separated instruments using a loop technique: Case series with a rapid review.Dental research journal · 2025Article
- Management of Radix Entomolaris of Mandibular First Molar With Complex Root Canal Curvatures: A Case Report and Mini Review.Clinical case reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
The study aimed to evaluate the efficiency of the BTR-Pen system in removing different types of instrument fragments from root canals and to assess its effect on fracture resistance of the roots after the removal of the instruments. One hundred thirty human teeth were divided into 10 groups (2 control groups and 8 study groups) according to the localization and type of the fractured fragment as well as the retrieval techniques. Broken instruments were extracted either with BTR-Pen system loops or removed using solely ultrasonic tips. The success rate of instrument removal and consumed time were recorded. All the teeth were subjected to a load at a 1 mm/min rate in a universal testing machine for mechanical testing. The success of removing broken instruments using the BTR-Pen and ultrasonic was 86.7% and 83.3%, respectively (p > 0.05). When the time is compared, the BTR-Pen system (23.97 ± 8.35 min) showed similar results to that of the ultrasonic technique (24.1 ± 8.28 min) (p > 0.05). The BTR-Pen group required less force to fracture than the ultrasonic group (p = 0.024). In conclusion, the BTR-Pen and ultrasonic groups showed no significant difference in terms of the success rate and removal time. The roots that underwent instrument removal using the BTR-Pen system had less fracture resistance.
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.