ArticlePeerJ2025
Finite element analysis of root canal filling materials in retained primary molars with congenital tooth agenesis.
Article in PeerJ, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Influence of Restorative Material Properties on Dentin Stress Distribution: A 3D Finite Element Analysis of Bioflx and Zirconia Crowns.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The selection of an appropriate filling material in root canal treatments of primary molars is crucial for long-term success. However, evaluating the biomechanical behavior of these materials under Methods: A mandibular second primary molar extracted for orthodontic reasons was used in the study. The tooth was scanned using micro-computed tomography (micro-CT) to obtain original DICOM data, which were imported into Geomagic + SpaceClaim 2023R2 to create a solid model. A total force of 330 N was applied to three points on the occlusal surface of each model. The analysis was conducted using Ansys mesh and evaluated with Hyperview 2024. Maximum von Mises (vM) stress values were used to assess stress distribution. Results: The highest vM stress in the remaining dentin was observed in the gutta-percha (GP) + AH Plus model (148.5 MPa), followed by mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) (127.24 MPa), Biodentine (125.65 MPa), and GP + BioRoot RCS (118.37 MPa). Stress concentrations were primarily located in the pericervical region. The GP + AH Plus group showed the highest stress, while the GP + BioRoot RCS group showed the lowest. Among contemporary filling materials, GP + BioRoot RCS demonstrated the lowest dentin stress, suggesting it may offer better root fracture resistance. However, generalizing these findings is difficult due to limited data on primary teeth in the literature. Conclusion: The study suggests that GP + BioRoot RCS may be a more promising filling material for enhancing root fracture resistance in primary molars. Further research is needed to validate these findings in clinical settings.
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.