ArticleCureus2025
Comparative Evaluation of Resistance of Teeth to Vertical Fracture After Root Canal Preparation With Different Instrumentation Techniques: An In Vitro Study.
Article in Cureus, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionNickel-titanium (Ni-Ti) instrumentation systems have been extensively studied for their clinical performance; however, limited evidence exists regarding their effect on the resistance of endodontically treated teeth to vertical root fractures (VRFs). This investigation aimed to assess and compare the VRF resistance of teeth prepared using various root canal instrumentation methods.
methodsAn a priori power analysis was performed to determine the required sample size. Seventy extracted human mandibular premolars were decoronated and assigned to one control and four experimental groups: Hand instrumentation using hand K-files (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland), rotary instrumentation using ProTaper NEXT (Dentsply Sirona, Ballaigues, Switzerland), reciprocation WaveOne Gold (Dentsply Sirona, Ballaigues, Switzerland), and a hybrid technique, a combination of ProTaper Universal (Dentsply Sirona, Ballaigues, Switzerland) with hand K-file (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland). Root canals were shaped and filled following each system's protocol, except in the control group. All specimens were mounted in acrylic resin and subjected to vertical fracture testing using a universal loading machine (Shanta Engineering, Maharashtra, India).
resultsThe control group exhibited the greatest resistance to VRFs (271 ± 65.7 N). Among the instrumented groups, the hand K-file group demonstrated the highest resistance (221.33 ± 58.8 N), whereas the WaveOne Gold group showed the lowest resistance (189.33 ± 47.9 N). A statistically significant difference was observed between the control and experimental groups (p = 0.004).
conclusionInstrumentation using hand K-files preserved more dentinal structure, resulting in greater fracture resistance. Conversely, WaveOne Gold preparation was associated with reduced VRF resistance compared to the other techniques.
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.