ArticleInternational journal of clinical pediatric dentistry2025
Comparison of Success of Endodontic Treatment in Primary Mandibular Molars Restored with Zirconia and Bulk-fill Composite Resins: A Split-mouth Randomized Clinical Trial.
Article in International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In recent decades, parents are highly concerned for improving the cosmetic effectiveness of primary teeth restorations. Aim: To assess and evaluate the success of the endodontic treatment in primary mandibular molars restored with zirconia crown and bulk-filled (BF) composite resins. Materials and methods: In this split-mouth randomized controlled trial, 25 children aged 4-8-year-old were randomized into zirconia and BF groups. The endodontic treatment success and survival of restorations were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analysis. Results: Survival rate was 88% in zirconia and 84% in BF for interradicular radiolucency, and the survival rate was 92% in zirconia and 88% in BF for periapical radiolucency. The survival rate difference between the two categories was 4% in both groups. The assumed noninferiority margin was 15%; according to that, in terms of endodontic success, the BF method was noninferior to the zirconia crown. The study failed to show the noninferiority of BF in terms of survival of restorations. Conclusion: The survival rate of endodontic treatment of BF was noninferior to zirconia, so BF can be considered as a postendodontic esthetic restoration in coronally restorable teeth. Clinical significance: (1) BF composite resin can be used as a postendodontic restoration to satisfy the esthetic demand in developing countries like India. (2) Failure in BF restorations can lead to inadequacy in endodontic treatment. How to cite this article: Zacharia NA, Paulindraraj S, Ramkumar H,
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.