ArticleJournal of materials science. Materials in medicine2024
Modern methods and materials used to treat root perforation: effectiveness comparison.
Article in Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Endodontic treatment of a molar-incisor malformation of the maxillary first molar: a case report.Restorative dentistry & endodontics · 2026Article
- Hexaallylaminocyclotriphosphazene-Modified Dental Compositions for 3D Printing of Dental Crowns.Polymers · 2025Article
- Evaluation of the Effect of Chitosan-Based Irrigation Solutions on the Bond Strength of Mineral Trioxide Aggregate to Bulk-Fill Composite.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aims to experimentally compare the efficacy of different endodontic materials (iRoot BP Plus, Biodentine, MTA, Rootdent, and Trioxide) in the treatment of pulpitis and perforations on extracted tooth specimens. Additionally, the study aims to investigate the influence of iRoot BP Plus endodontic material on the regenerative processes following pulp amputation in laboratory animals. The secondary goal is to evaluate the effect of iRoot BP Plus on the restoration process in laboratory animals after pulp removal. The study presents a micropermeability analysis of the selected biomaterials performed on a sample of 50 single-rooted apical teeth in 2022. All teeth underwent endodontic treatment. Changes in molar morphology were investigated with eight laboratory animals (rabbits, 3 months old, all males) after simulated pulp removal and subsequent treatment with the iRoot BP Plus biomaterials. iRoot BP Plus appeared to be more effective in retrograde apical root filling than other biomaterials, as evidenced by its higher sealing effect. An experiment involving animal participants revealed the presence of protective adaptive mechanisms, which manifested in the form of an inflammatory process within 6 weeks after the dental pulp was removed. The connective tissue replaced the necrosis, and new capillaries began to form intensively. These dental outcomes suggest that iRoot BP Plus enables hermetical sealing in tooth restoration with good adhesion. Thus, it may have the ability to promote more active tissue regeneration after pulp removal.
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.