ArticleJournal of conservative dentistry and endodontics
A cone-beam computed tomographic analysis of total dentin removed, canal transportation, and canal-centering ability following instrumentation with three different file systems: An
Article in Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of mechanized instrumentation on distal wall thickness of the second mesiobuccal canal.Acta odontologica latinoamericana : AOL · 2025Article
- Comparative evaluation of canal transportation and centering ratio of different nickel-titanium rotary file systems in curved canals using cone-beam computed tomography: AnJournal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 2025Article
- Postoperative pain evaluation in patients undergoing endodontic treatment subsequent to working length determination with and without integrated apex locator endomotor: Randomized control trial.Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 2024Article
- Characteristics and Effectiveness of XP-Endo Files and Systems: A Narrative Review.International journal of dentistry · 2024Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims: The aim of this study was to evaluate the shaping ability following instrumentation with XP-endo Shaper (XPS), TruNatomy (TRN), and HyFlex CM (HCM) file system. Subjects and Methods: Fifty-four mesiobuccal canals of mandibular molars were selected and allocated into three groups randomly: XPS, TRN system, and HCM file system. Pre- and postinstrumentation scans were taken using a cone-beam computed tomography scanner to determine the amount of root dentin removed, mesiodistal and buccolingual transportation, and canal-centering ratio at 2, 5, and 8 mm from the root end. Statistical Analysis Used: Data were statistically analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis test and the significance level was set at Results: TRN file system removed the least amount of root dentin. XPS showed statistically higher M-D canal transportation at 5 mm level from the apex. Conclusions: TRN file system showed better dentin preservation as compared to XPS and HCM. XPS showed the highest canal transportation at 5 mm. All three file systems performed similarly in terms of canal-centering ability.
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.