ArticleCureus2024
Marginal Adaptation of BioRoot RCS, MTA-Fillapex, EpoxySeal, and Sealapex to Radicular Dentin: An In Vitro Study.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Introduction The primary goal of endodontic therapy is to achieve a three-dimensional filling of the root canal. The sealer plays a crucial role in filling the residual gaps between the gutta-percha and the canal wall, which prevents fluids and bacteria from entering the canal and causing complications. This study evaluates and compares the sealing ability of four root canal sealers to the root dentin. Methods and materials In this study, forty single-rooted mandibular premolar teeth with fully-formed apices were collected. The teeth were decoronated and instrumented. Later, the teeth were randomly divided into four groups, each comprising ten specimens, based on the sealer used for obturation. The first group was obturated with BioRoot RCS (Septodont, Septodont Holding, Paris, France), the second group with MTA-Fillapex (Angelus, Angelus Indústria de Produtos Odontológicos S/A, Brazil), the third group with EpoxySeal (Safe Endo, SafeEndo Dental India Pvt. Ltd., Gujarat, India), and the fourth group with Sealapex (Kerr, Kerr Corporation, Brea, CA). Following obturation, the teeth were sectioned vertically using a diamond disc, and the marginal adaptation of these sealers to the root dentin was assessed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The values were then statistically analyzed. Results EpoxySeal showed the maximum amount of marginal adaptation (5.22±0.47), followed by BioRoot RCS (5.48±0.58) and MTA-Fillapex (8.24±0.74), and the least amount of marginal adaptation was shown by Sealapex (11.64±1.35). Based on the analysis of variance (ANOVA), a statistically significant difference (p≤0.001) was observed. According to Tukey's post hoc test, the mean difference between all groups showed statistical significance (p≤0.05) except between BioRoot RCS and EpoxySeal. Conclusion Within the limitations of this in vitro study, it is concluded that EpoxySeal and BioRoot RCS exhibited superior marginal adaptation to the root dentin. BioRoot RCS can be recommended as a sealer of choice owing to its additional properties, such as antimicrobial and hydrophilic affinity during setting.
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.