ArticleBrazilian dental journal2026
Root Canal Filling of Teeth with Open Apex Using Different Techniques, Low-Temperature Gutta-Percha Points, and Bioceramic Sealers.
Article in Brazilian dental journal, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To evaluate the impact of different root canal filling techniques on the push-out resistance to dislodgment of the filling material to dentin, the quality of the filling interface, and root temperature variation in teeth with open apex. Forty-eight human maxillary canines with open apex were divided into 4 experimental groups, according to the technique for root canal filling: Group I - apical barrier with MTA and backfill technique, Group II - apical filling with conventional points and continuous wave technique (4mm/200ºC), Group III - apical filling with low-fusion gutta-percha points and continuous wave technique (4mm/100ºC), Group IV - conventional single cone technique. Temperature changes on the outer surface of the root were measured in thirds during the filling. BS was evaluated using the push-out test. The adhesive interface was examined using scanning electron microscopy. Analysis of variance was used to analyze BS and temperature variation data, while the chi-square test was used to analyze failure type. The fit of the filling material to the dentin wall was evaluated using non-parametric Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis tests, followed by Dunn's test. The group using the MTA barrier (4.5±3.5) showed higher BS values compared to the conventional points (2.8±1.1), low-fusion points (3.1±2.1), and the single cone technique (2.7±2.3) (p<0.05). In terms of temperature variation, a greater temperature increase was observed in the low-fusion points group (p<0.05). MTA barrier exhibited the highest BS values and adhesive interface quality, while the continuous wave condensation technique, regardless of the type of gutta-percha point used, showed intermediate values compared to the single cone technique.
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.