ArticleThe Saudi dental journal2026
Evaluation of various obturation techniques with AH Plus Jet sealer in simulated C-shaped canals.
Article in The Saudi dental journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparative evaluation of obturation techniques for C-shaped canals: a network meta-analysis.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study compared the quality and efficiency of three obturation techniques for simulated 3D-printed C-shaped canals filled with an epoxy resin-based sealer. A mandibular molar with a C-shaped root canal (C1 configuration) was prepared to size #30/0.04, and 30 replicas were 3D-printed. The canals were obturated with AH Plus Jet sealer using cold lateral compaction (CLC), warm vertical compaction (WVC), or warm vertical hybrid compaction (HC) (n = 10). Cross-sections at the apical, middle, and coronal thirds were examined under a digital microscope to determine the proportions of gutta-percha, sealer, and voids. Obturation time was also recorded. Data were analyzed with one-way ANOVA and LSD post-hoc tests (α = 0.05). In the apical third, void percentages were significantly lower for CLC (1.00±0.21%) and HC (1.00±0.43%) compared with WVC (P<0.001), although the effect size indicated only a modest difference (η
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.