ArticleBMC oral health2025
Evaluation of the effectiveness of different supplemental cleaning techniques in the retreatment of roots with small simulated internal resorption cavities: an in vitro comparative study.
Article in BMC oral health, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe irregular morphology of internal root resorption (IRR) cavities complicates non-surgical retreatment by limiting effective cleaning and complete removal of filling materials. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of three supplemental techniques-the EndoActivator System (EAS), passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI), and XP-Endo Finisher R (XPR)-for removing filling materials from simulated IRR cavities.
methodsOne hundred single-rooted maxillary central incisors were decoronated and split longitudinally. Standardized simulated IRR cavities (0.8 mm depth, 1.6 mm diameter) were prepared using a round diamond bur, followed by a nitric-acid demineralization protocol. Hemisections were reassembled with cyanoacrylate gel and sealed with wax. The canals were obturated with gutta-percha and AH Plus using lateral condensation apically and continuous heat vertical compaction in the IRR region. Five teeth served as negative controls and five as positive controls. After mechanical filling removal, the remaining specimens were randomly assigned to three supplementary cleaning techniques-PUI, EAS, and XPR (n = 30). All groups received the same NaOCl-saline-EDTA irrigation regimen. Residual filling material was assessed by two independent examiners under ×12.5 magnification and quantified using ImageJ software. The data were compared between groups using Kruskal-Wallis tests, and intra- and inter-examiner agreement was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).
resultsNone of the supplemental techniques achieved complete removal of filling material from the simulated IRR cavities. Numerical differences among PUI, EAS, and XPR were small and not statistically significant (p > 0.05). Inter- and intra-examiner agreement was excellent (ICC > 0.95).
conclusionsAll three techniques reduced residual filling material in the simulated IRR cavities, but none achieved complete cleaning, and no statistically significant differences were found among groups.
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.