ReviewBiomaterial investigations in dentistry2024
Biological properties versus solubility of endodontic sealers and cements.
Review in Biomaterial investigations in dentistry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative Dentinal Tubule Penetration of Three Calcium Silicate-Based Sealers Under Conventional and Sonic-Activated Final Irrigation Protocols: An In Vitro Confocal Microscopy Study.Dentistry journal · 2026Article
- Outcome and erosion of root-end filling materials following endodontic apical surgery: a minimum follow-up of 4 years.Clinical oral investigations · 2026Article
- Bioactivity and dimensional stability of resin-, hybrid-, and silicate-based endodontic sealers: An in vitro comparative study.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2026Review
- Physicochemical Characterization and In Vitro Biocompatibility of Epoxy- and Silicone-Based Endodontic Materials.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Endodontic Sealers and Innovations to Enhance Their Properties: A Current Review.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Microstructural and elemental characterization of novel bioactive glass bioceramic sealer using Fourier transform infrared and X-ray diffraction analysis.Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Endodontic sealers and cements used in root canal treatment have different compositions and properties. Common to all materials is that their primary goal is to fill gaps and voids, making a permanent seal of the root canal system. Furthermore, aspects such as antibacterial properties, cytotoxicity, setting time, solubility and biocompatibility are also crucial and ought to be considered. Over the years, a shift in the view on the importance of these aspects has ocurred. Whereas the antibacterial properties were considered important when the technical factors in endodontics were less developed, the sealing ability and biocompatibility have later been considered the most critical factors. The introduction of tricalcium silicate cements and sealers has led to a renewed interest in material properties, as these cements seem to have good sealing ability and at the same time combine favourable antimicrobial effects with excellent biocompatibility. This review discusses how the various properties of root canal sealers and cements may conflict with the primary aim of providing a permanent seal of the root canal system.
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.