ArticleOdontology2026
Physical and mechanical properties of a strontium silicate-based sealer.
Article in Odontology, 2026. 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
introductionThis study aimed to evaluate the physical and mechanical properties of an endodontic sealer containing strontium silicates (Sr-Si sealer, C-Root SP, Beijing, China) compared to a calcium silicate-based sealer (Ca-Si sealer, Endosequence BC Sealer, Savannah, USA).
methodsElemental composition of the sealers was confirmed by energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS). Afterwards, particle size was evaluated with SEM (scanning electron microscopy). Flow (n = 10 per group), setting time. (n = 5), film thickness (n = 10), and radiopacity (n = 10) were tested under ISO 6876/2012 standards. To mimic clinical applications, a pressure-flow test (n = 10) was designed and carried out to estimate the forces needed to initiate sealer flow into dentin tubules. A direct observation on sealer penetration depth inside dentin tubule was also performed by SEM with 20 extracted single-canaled teeth, obturated with either Sr-Si or Ca-Si sealer (n = 10 each) using hydraulic condensation technique, resulting in 1080 per sealer group. The data were analyzed with a t test (α = 0.05).
resultsThe Sr-Si sealer contained 10.6 wt% Sr and an average particle size of 1.59 ± 0.97 µm, while the Ca-Si sealer contained 27.0 wt% Ca and a particle size at 8.05 ± 5.66 µm. The Sr-Si sealer also contained 16.2% tantalum which was not found in Ca-Si sealer. In the ISO tests, the Sr-Si sealer showed longer setting time, better flowability, and radiopacity (p < 0.01). The force to initiate the flow in simulated tubules for the Sr-Si sealer was 11.00 ± 0.74 N, significantly lower than the Ca-Si sealer's 21.51 ± 2.59 N. The results were also consistent with the observation on extracted teeth that Sr-Si sealer penetrated further than Ca-Si sealer.
conclusionsThe properties of the Sr-Si sealer suggest that it possesses desirable characteristics based on current in vitro criteria. While these results provide a strong foundation for its application, conclusions regarding its long-term clinical suitability depend on further clinical trials.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41581096What 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.