ArticleBMC oral health2025
Evaluation of dentinal crack formation during post space preparation using different fiber post systems with micro-computed tomography.
Article in BMC oral health, 2025. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study used micro-computed tomography (µCT) to assess the post space preparation systems [Rebilda (VOCO), RelyX (3M)] and preparations of varying lengths to create root dentin cracks.
methodsForty extracted maxillary first premolars with two roots were randomly divided into four groups. Teeth were decoronated to a length of 18 mm. Following root canal treatment, first µCT scans were performed. Post spaces were prepared with Rebilda post drills at 1/2 of the working length (WL) in Group 1 and at 2/3 of the WL in Group 2, while post spaces were prepared with RelyX post drills at 1/2 of the WL in Group 3 and at 2/3 of the WL in Group 4. After post space preparation, second µCT scans were performed. Dentinal cracks were detected by comparing the first and second µCT scan images, which were classified as "newly formed cracks", "advanced cracks" and "completed cracks". The chi-square test was used to compare among the groups, with a p-value of < 0.05 considered statistically significant.
resultsNo statistically significant differences were observed between the groups for completed and advanced cracks (P > 0.05). In terms of newly formed cracks, the Rebilda-2/3 group showed more cracks than the RelyX-1/2 group, and the RelyX-2/3 group had more cracks than the RelyX-1/2 group (P < 0.05).
conclusionCompleted and advanced cracks were observed in all groups, while no newly formed cracks were detected in the RelyX-1/2 group. The type of post drill and the preparation length are crucial factors in preventing the development of root dentinal cracks. Preparing 1/2 of the canal length may be a safer preparation length, and the RelyX drill may pose less risk of inducing root dentinal cracks.
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.