ArticleBMC oral health2026
A laboratory study comparing two methods for removing plastic carrier obturators from severely curved root canals.
Article in BMC oral health, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRemoving plastic carrier obturators during root canal retreatment is challenging and often takes a long time. The aim of this laboratory investigation is to compare a recently described indirect, two-stage technique for removing plastic carriers from curved canals and evaluate its efficiency, safety and efficacy in comparison to a conventional direct technique.
methodsThirty-six extracted mandibular premolars were chosen and root filled with plastic carrier obturators and endodontic cement. The teeth were allocated randomly into two different retreatment techniques: Group 0 (Direct technique), where the plastic carriers were removed together with the gutta-percha using rotary NiTi files; Group 1 (Indirect technique), where the carriers were removed first using an ultrasonic tip and Hedström files, with the surrounding gutta-percha being removed subsequently with rotary NiTi endodontic files. The duration of retreatment procedures, number of fractured instruments and plastic carriers, ledge formation, apical transportation and root canal perforations were recorded for each technique, as well as the amount of remaining root filling material. The Student's t-test and Fisher's exact tests were used to determine significant differences among groups for each variable.
resultsRemoval of root fillings was significantly more rapid in Group 1 (p < 0.05). Fracture of the carrier, ledge creation and apical deviation, occurred significantly less often in Group 1 (p < 0.05), although the intergroup comparisons of the other variables revealed no significance differences (p > 0.05). Root canal perforations did not occur in either group.
conclusionsIn this laboratory study on extracted teeth, the indirect technique of removing plastic carriers before the gutta-percha was more rapid and associated with fewer intra-operative complications in terms of fracture of the carrier, ledge formation and apical transportation.
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.