ArticleJournal of Taibah University Medical Sciences2024
Effectiveness of H-files and Pro-Taper universal systems in removing Gutta-percha during endodontic retreatment: A comparative study.
Article in Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Removal of overextended root canal filling beyond the apex in lower premolar teeth using two different retreatment rotary files versus manual files: a comparative in vitro study.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Dentinal loss and cleaning efficiency of retreatment files with irrigation activation: AnJournal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 2026Article
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
Objective: This research was aimed at assessing the effectiveness of manual H-files versus a combination of a Pro-Taper universal rotary canal preparation system and retreatment system in removing gutta-percha (GP) during endodontic retreatment, by using a digital radiography technique. Methods: This ex vivo study used a non-probability consecutive sampling technique. The study sample comprised 60 extracted anterior permanent teeth, each with one root with a straight root canal (RC). After preparation, RCs were obturated with GP and sealer. Subsequently, teeth were stored for 2 weeks in a humid environment at 37 °C. Thirty teeth each were randomly assigned to the control (group I), and experimental (group II) groups. GP removal was performed with H-files {group I) or a combination of a Pro-Taper universal rotary canal preparation system and retreatment system (group 2). Digital radiographs were acquired with Carestream digital radiovisiography software (Kodak; version-VER.6.10.8.3-A), and the presence of residual GP was analyzed. AutoCAD (2006) software was used to demarcate the RC and residual root filling. The residual GP in both groups was compared with independent sample t-tests. Results: The remaining root filling did not significantly differ when GP was removed with conventional Hedstrom files versus a combination of Pro-Taper Universal preparation and retreatment file systems. The residual GP was confined to the apical third of the canals in both groups. Conclusions: Pro-Taper Universal preparation and retreatment file systems have similar effectiveness to manual H-files in GP removal in straight canals.
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.