ArticleIranian endodontic journal2026
Analysis of Bond Strength of Bioceramic Sealer Following Irrigation with Chlorhexidine.
Article in Iranian endodontic journal, 2026. 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.
- Effects of SWEEPS Laser-Activated Irrigation and Diode Laser Irradiation on Void Formation and Bond Strength of a New Premixed Calcium Silicate Sealer, BioRoot Flow-An In Vitro Study.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This study aimed to evaluate the bond strength of a bioceramic endodontic sealer and AH-Plus sealer irrigated with 2% chlorhexidine (CHX), compared to irrigation with 2.5% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) as a control group. Materials and Methods: Thirty freshly extracted single-rooted human teeth were prepared using reciprocating R25 and R40 files. Irrigation consisted of 2.5% NaOCl in the control group and 2% CHX gel in the experimental group, with additional irrigation using saline solution after each instrument change. Samples were divided into four groups: two with CHX, one with bioceramic sealer, and the other with AH-Plus sealer, and two with hypochlorite, one with bioceramic sealer and the other with AH-Plus sealer. The teeth were sectioned, and the resulting slices were subjected to the push-out test using a mechanical testing machine for measuring the microtensile force. After testing, samples were examined to determine the failure pattern. Data normality was assessed (Shapiro-Wilk, Results: AH-Plus exhibited higher bond strength than Sealer Plus BC across all root thirds, independent of irrigant. For Sealer Plus BC, bond strength was influenced by irrigant, with NaOCl producing higher values than CHX ( Conclusion: AH-Plus exhibited superior bond strength irrespective of the irrigant used. In contrast, the bond strength of the Sealer Plus bioceramic sealer was influenced by the irrigant, with NaOCl yielding higher values than CHX.
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.