ArticleJournal of conservative dentistry and endodontics2024
Comparative evaluation of push-out bond strength and mode of failure of three different obturating materials: An
Article in Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics, 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.
- Push-out bond strength of zinc oxide eugenol sealer, bioceramic sealer and bioactive glass sealer to dentin among heat generated thermoplasticized gutta-percha technique.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- Effect of different root canal drying techniques on the push-out bond strength of ceraseal sealer - AnJournal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 2025Article
- Comparative evaluation of physicochemical properties of various root canal sealers: AnJournal 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: This research aimed to assess the push-out bond strength (PBS) to dentin of three distinct obturation materials inside the root canal and identify the failure mechanism. Materials and Methods: The research used 30 undamaged human mandibular premolars. The specimens were randomly assigned to three groups, each employing a different sealer ( Results: The average PBS was greatest for AH Plus, followed by CeraSeal and Guttaflow-2. Notable disparities existed between the coronal and apical levels. Conclusion: AH Plus exhibited superior PBS qualities to root dentin compared to other sealers.
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.