ArticleCureus2024
Comparative Evaluation of Microleakage in Endodontically Treated Teeth Using an Alkasite Restorative Material Versus Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Cement (RMGIC) as an Intraorifice Barrier: A Study Protocol.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparative Evaluation of Microleakage Around Pre-Endodontic Buildup with Composite, Light Cured Glass Ionomer Cement, and Glass Ionomer Cement: AnJournal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background The most popular approach to treating pulpal and periapical disease is endodontic therapy, but the most common failure after root canal therapy, if not followed by planned rehabilitation of the tooth, is tooth fracture, which may be so severe in some cases needing extraction. Inadequate endodontic restorations increase the risk of fracture and coronal leakage, which can disseminate bacteria and their byproducts and perhaps lead to the failure of root canal therapy. In order to offer protection against masticatory forces along with compressive obturation forces that can lead to vertical root fracture, research has also supported the use of post-endodontic treatment restorative materials with an elastic modulus that is either greater or comparable to the tooth itself for post-endodontic restorations. Restorative materials that can bond to root dentin can be used to create intraorifice barriers, which prevent coronal microleakage and reinforce the radicular dentin. The current in vitro study aims to assess the effects of various intraorifice barriers (an alkasite restorative material versus resin-modified glass ionomer cement) on the sealing ability of the intraorifice barriers following root canal therapy. Methodology In vitro, confocal laser microscopy is used to determine the microleakage of various intraorifice barriers. Conclusion The sealing ability of a post-endodontic restoration is crucial for the overall success of endodontic treatment, and this in vitro study protocol would ultimately help in selecting the appropriate intraorifice barrier.
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.