ArticleOdontology2025
Effect of a novel irrigation regimen and root canal filling material versus conventional endodontic protocols on dentin wettability.
Article in Odontology, 2025. 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.
- Assessment of Sealing Ability and Degradation Resistance of a Hydrogel-Based Root Canal Filling Material Using a Bacterial Leakage Model and SEM Analysis.BioMed research international · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of different irrigation regimens on the dentin wettability of root canal sealers. The occlusal surfaces of human molar teeth (N = 90) were removed, polished, and divided into three groups (n = 30) based on the irrigation regimen: control group (SAL), standard irrigation group (NES), and test group (ODC). Each group was randomly divided into three subgroups according to the root canal sealer: AH Plus (AHP), Total Fill BC Sealer HiFlow (TOT), and OdneFill (ODF). The contact angle was determined using the sessile drop technique. The pendant droplet method assessed the work of adhesion. Surface roughness was measured using atomic force microscopy. Data were analyzed using non-parametric tests (p < .05). ODC-ODF showed significantly lower contact angle (34.80°) than ODC-AHP (66.53°, p < .001) and ODC-TOT (85.72°, p < .001). In NES, no significant difference was found between ODF and AHP (p > .05) while both groups presented significantly lower results than TOT (p < .001, p < .001, respectively). In SAL, the difference between TOT (92.84°) and AHP (83.24°) was insignificant (p > .05), whereas ODF presented significantly lower results compared to both (p < .001, p < .001, respectively). Surface roughness was lowest in ODC (31.54 nm), followed by SAL (62.30 nm) and NES (72.02 nms) which was significantly (p = 0.006) higher than ODC, whereas the difference between SAL and NES was insignificant (p > .05). This study highlights the wettability of a new root canal sealer and the effect of a new irrigation activation system on the wettability of different root canal sealers. OdneFill showed superior wettability compared to other sealers while exhibiting a synergistic effect with OdneClean.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39475985What 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.