Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40863313›Full record

ReviewJournal of functional biomaterials2025

Efficacy of Endodontic Files in Root Canal Retreatment: A Systematic Review of In Vitro Studies.

Anna Soler-Doria, José Luis Sanz, Marcello Maddalone, Leopoldo Forner

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of functional biomaterials, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Anna Soler-DoriaDepartment of Stomatology, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Universitat de València, Gascó Oliag 1, 46010 Valencia, Spain.
José Luis SanzDepartment of Stomatology, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Universitat de València, Gascó Oliag 1, 46010 Valencia, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-5438-8085
Marcello MaddaloneDepartamento di Medicina e Chirurgia, Università degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca, 20854 Milan, Italy.
Leopoldo FornerDepartment of Stomatology, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Universitat de València, Gascó Oliag 1, 46010 Valencia, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-8603-9883

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The success rate of root canal treatment is high, but it can fail. In these cases, orthograde root canal retreatment is often the treatment of choice, for which numerous biomaterials are available on the market, including endodontic files. This systematic review aimed to study the endodontic files available on the market and establish their efficacy in root canal retreatment. An electronic search of six different databases was performed, and in vitro experimental studies that studied root canal cleaning, debris extrusion, retreatment time, or dentinal damage produced with any of the comparison methods were selected. The quality of the studies was assessed with the QUIN scale. In total, 78 studies were included for the analysis, of which 9 had a high risk of bias, 53 had a moderate risk, and 16 had a low risk. The methods used to evaluate the efficacy of endodontic files in root canal retreatment are heterogeneous. Manual files produce more apical extrusion than rotary files. PTUR files are the most studied endodontic files. It is the file system that leaves the least residual filling material in the canal, takes the least time during retreatment, and removes the greatest amount of dentine. However, no file system achieved the complete removal of the root canal filling material. No consistent pattern emerged across studies when comparing rotary files with continuous and reciprocating rotation in terms of the removal of the filling material, the time required for de-obturation, dentine damage produced, or apical extrusion.

Indexed as

endodontic filesroot canal retreatmentsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID40863313
PMCPMC12387160

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.