ArticleCureus2024
Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Analysis of Retreatability of Resin and Bio-ceramic Sealer For Root Canal Treatment: 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. 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.
- Comparative assessment of retreatment systems for the removal of root canal filling materials using cone-beam computed tomography: AnJournal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 2026Article
- Comparative evaluation sealing ability: Bioceramic versus resin-based sealers by micro-CT analysis.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- Evaluation of three obturation techniques in 3D-printed models of oval canals with standardized prepared morphology: a micro-CT study.BMC oral health · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Root canal retreatment (Re-RCT) cases have shortcomings due to the ineffective removal of the root canal filling material, eventually leading to endodontic failure. This study aims to test the comparative efficacy of retreatment files in removing calcium silicate-based sealer and epoxy resin-based sealer. Thirty-two single-rooted teeth were decoronated at 15 mm and bio-mechanical preparation was performed. These samples were divided into two groups based on the sealer used - Angelus Bio-C ceramic sealer (Angelus, Londrina-PR, Brazil) and AH Plus sealer (Dentsply Sirona, North Carolina, US). Obturation was done and all the samples were stored in the incubator according to the respective setting time of the sealer. After this, the samples in each group were subdivided into two groups based on the retreatment files used, i.e., Neoendo (Orikam Healthcare India Pvt. Ltd., Haryana, India) and Dentsply (Dentsply Sirona, North Carolina, US) retreatment files. The specimens were then sectioned vertically into two halves and analyzed by cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). A one-way ANOVA F test was used for an intragroup comparison, whereas a post hoc Tukey test was used for an intergroup comparison. The Dentsply retreatment files were superior to the Neoendo retreatment files and the Bio-C ceramic sealer was left behind to a greater extent than the AH Plus sealer. Thus, Dentsply retreatment files were more efficient than Neoendo files and the removal of the Bio-C ceramic sealer was more difficult than the AH Plus sealer.
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.