ArticleCureus2024
Obturation of Simulated Internal Resorption Cavities With Four Different Techniques and a Hydraulic Root Canal Sealer: A Comparative Stereomicroscopic Evaluation.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparative evaluation of obturation techniques for C-shaped canals: a network meta-analysis.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Evaluation of the effectiveness of different supplemental cleaning techniques in the retreatment of roots with small simulated internal resorption cavities: an in vitro comparative 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim To compare the quality of obturation using WVC (warm vertical compaction), CLC (cold lateral compaction), injectable (iFill), and Thermafil (GuttaCore) techniques, along with hydraulic condensation of bioceramic (BC) sealer, and evaluating the percentage of gutta-percha (GP), sealer, and voids in simulated internal resorptive lesions, using an advanced stereomicroscope with ImageJ software (National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA). Methods and material In this study, 40 freshly extracted maxillary incisors were collected, and endodontic instrumentation was done to working length using hand K-files. Simulated internal resorption cavities were created in the middle-apical third of the roots after horizontal sectioning and were re-cemented. The root canals were obturated using four techniques: WVC, CLC, iFill, and Thermafil, along with BC sealer. After one week, the samples were resectioned, the surfaces were photographed, and the percentage of GP, sealer, and voids in resorptive cavities was calculated using an advanced stereomicroscope and ImageJ software, respectively. The data were statistically analyzed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and post-hoc Tukey tests. Results The iFill approach had the highest total filled area in the simulated resorptive region (96%), followed by WVC (92%), CLC (91%), and GuttaCore (77%). CLC had a notably high percentage of sealers (46%), compared to WVC (40%) and Thermacore (41%). With 23% of voids, the GuttaCore technique was considered the least successful. Conclusions Warm GP condensation techniques, combined with hydraulic sealer in filling artificial resorption cavities, outperformed the other obturation procedures.
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.