ArticleFrontiers in dental medicine2024
Comparison of volumetric analysis between conventional and rotary files in the preparation of root canals in primary molars-an
Article in Frontiers in dental medicine, 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: To compare and evaluate the efficacy of canal preparation and volumetric filling of primary molars instrumented by conventional hand K-file, ProAF baby rotary file and Kedo-S square file using cone beam computed tomography. Materials and methods: Thirty freshly extracted human primary second molars were randomly divided into 3 groups of 10 teeth each. After access opening and working length determination, preoperative volume analysis was done using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). The canals were then instrumented by either hand K-files, Pro AF Baby rotary files and Kedo-S square rotary files. Post operative volume analysis was performed using CBCT. All the canals were obturated using Metapex and scanned again using CBCT. Mean values of the pre- and post-operative canal volumes were analyzed using one-way ANOVA. Inter- and intra- group volumetric changes were analyzed statistically by Results: The mean difference in volume after canal preparation and obturation was the highest in the hand K-file group, followed by Pro AF Baby Gold group and the least in the Kedo-S square group. Inter and intra group comparison showed statistically significant differences for all the file groups used. Conclusion: Kedo- S square showed the least difference in preparation volume and better obturating volume compared to Pro AF baby gold file systems.
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.