ArticleScientific reports2025
Marginal adaptation of heat and non-heat compatible bioceramic sealers in warm obturation: an in vitro SEM study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Indian Association of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics consensus statement on bioceramics in conservative dentistry and endodontics.Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 2026Article
- Comparative analysis between resin-based root canal sealer and recent bioceramic-based root canal sealers using MicroCT, film thickness, and solubility.Journal of oral biology and craniofacial researchArticle
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
Abstract
This study compared the marginal adaptation of iRoot SP (non-heat compatible sealer) and Endosequence BC HiFlow (heat-compatible sealer) after root canal obturation using single cone or warm vertical compaction techniques. Forty mandibular premolars were prepared and randomly divided into four groups based on sealer type and obturation technique. After obturation and incubation, the roots were sectioned at coronal, middle, and apical levels. Gap widths between the sealer and dentine were measured under a scanning electron microscope at 1,000X, and the average width at each level was calculated and analysed using one-way ANOVA and Tukey HSD post hoc test. No significant differences in gap width among the groups were observed at coronal and apical levels. At the middle level, HiFlow with warm vertical compaction had narrower gaps than with the single cone technique (p < 0.05). Coronal gaps were consistently larger than apical gaps (p < 0.01). Warm vertical compaction did not adversely affect the marginal adaptation of either iRoot SP or HiFlow. Both sealers can be used with the warm obturation technique without compromising sealing ability. Notably, HiFlow demonstrated improved adaptation, indicating potentially enhanced sealing performance.
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.