ReviewCureus2025
Pediatric Rotary Endodontic Files in Primary Teeth (2000-2025): A Scoping Review of Design, Evidence, and Clinical Use.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Endodontic Retreatment Using Rotary System and Aesthetic Rehabilitation of a Deciduous Central Maxillary Incisor in a 5-Year-Old Child: A Case Report.Case reports in dentistry · 2026Article
- Efficiency and obturation quality of Kedo-S rotary files versus hand files in pediatric endodontics.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- In vitro comparison of root canal obturation quality in primary molars using lentulo spiral and reverse rotary techniques with zinc oxide eugenol and endoflas: microcomputed tomography analysis.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rotary instrumentation is increasingly popular in pediatric endodontics, but the evidence for pediatric-specific systems remains fragmented. This scoping review aimed to map the design features, clinical outcomes, and evidence gaps of rotary file systems used in primary teeth. We conducted a systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar for studies published between 2000 and 2025. We included in vitro, clinical, and imaging-based studies, reviews, and case reports. Data on file design, study characteristics, and outcomes were extracted and synthesized. From 424 records, 111 studies were included. The results showed that pediatric-specific rotary systems (e.g., Kedo-S, Pro AF Baby Gold, Kedo-SG Blue) were consistently associated with reduced instrumentation time and improved canal shaping compared to manual techniques. Pediatric-specific rotary files demonstrate clear procedural advantages over manual methods. However, significant heterogeneity in study quality and limited global representation necessitate cautious interpretation. Future research should prioritize multicenter randomized controlled trials with long-term follow-up to provide higher-quality evidence.
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.