ArticleCase reports in dentistry2026
A Sealed Irrigation Approach for Root Resorption: Case Report With Review of Irrigation Strategies.
Article in Case reports in dentistry, 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.
- A Sealed Irrigation Approach for Root Resorption: Case Report With Review of Irrigation Strategies.Case reports in dentistry · 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: Root resorptive defects present significant diagnostic and clinical challenges, particularly when differentiating internal root resorption (IRR) from external cervical resorption (ECR). Their irregular anatomy complicates effective debridement and increases the risk of irrigant extrusion during conventional irrigation procedures. Case Presentation: A 33-year-old female with a history of asthma presented with a chief complaint related to maxillary lateral incisor #7. Clinical examination revealed normal probing depths, absence of tenderness to percussion and palpation, no mobility, and no response to cold testing. Periapical radiography demonstrated two well-defined, balloon-shaped radiolucencies in the coronal third of the canal. CBCT revealed an extensive resorptive defect with perforation of the buccal canal wall, round internal morphology, and thinning of dentinal walls-features most consistent with ECR, although a combined IRR/ECR process could not be excluded. Because of the patient's sensitivity to the odor of sodium hypochlorite, a sealed irrigation system was employed. A dual-needle setup was used in which 5.25% NaOCl was delivered apically through a 27-gauge needle while simultaneous coronal suction via a 22-gauge needle created controlled negative pressure within a sealed chamber. This configuration allowed continuous irrigant exchange and effective debridement while minimizing extrusion risk and patient discomfort. The canal was obturated using an MTA-based sealer. At the 17-month follow-up, the tooth remained functional and asymptomatic, with radiographs showing periapical stability and no evidence of recurrent or progressive resorption. Conclusion: This case demonstrates that a sealed, negative-pressure irrigation technique can provide a safe and effective method for managing complex resorptive defects-particularly when patient-related limitations and diagnostic ambiguity make traditional irrigation approaches insufficient.
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.