ArticleRestorative dentistry & endodontics2026
In vitro assessment of geometric characteristics in canal preparation using nickel-titanium files used for minimal invasiveness: an experimental study.
Article in Restorative dentistry & endodontics, 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objectives: This study aimed to assess geometric characteristics in canal preparation using nickel-titanium (NiTi) files used for minimal invasiveness. Methods: Thirty J-shaped simulated canals in resin blocks were instrumented with either TruNatomy (TR; Dentsply Sirona), EndoRoad (ER; Maruchi), or ProTaper Ultimate (PTU; Dentsply Sirona). The simulated canal blocks were scanned using microcomputed tomography before and after instrumentation. The scanned images were reconstructed, and the canal surface area was measured from 0.5 to 6.5 mm from the apex. Three-dimensional representative models of each group were rendered. The data were statistically analyzed using one-way analysis of variance and Kruskal-Wallis test at 95% significance level. Results: TR showed a superior ability to maintain the canal's center. TR demonstrated comparable apical preparation to PTU. ER showed a smaller and limited apical preparation than other systems, with a tendency for canal preparation toward the inner side of the curvature. PTU featured the largest prepared apical size among the file groups and tended to straighten the curvature by preparing the canal more towards the outward side. The surface area instrumented using each NiTi file showed statistically significant differences among the three groups at all levels except 0.5, 2.0, and 3.5 mm from the apex (p < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between TR and PTU at a level of 0.5 mm from the apex (p > 0.05). Conclusions: While PTU is suitable for general canal preparation to facilitate irrigation and intracanal medication, TR and ER excel in preserving canal centering with minimal concern for canal transportation by minimally invasive preparation.
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.