ArticleBMC oral health2026
Comparison of apical transportation and centering ratio between Bassi Logic and Protaper-Next NiTi rotary systems in curved canal by cone beam computed tomography: an in vitro study.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPreservation of the original root canal anatomy is essential for the long-term success of endodontic treatment. Effective cleaning and shaping of the root canal system are critical steps in this process; however, canal transportation is a common procedural error during the preparation of curved canals. This study aimed to compare canal transportation and centering ability between two rotary file systems, ProTaper Next and Bassi Logic, in curved root canals using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT).
methodsForty extracted human mandibular first molars with mature apices and an apical curvature ranging from 10° to 30° were selected. These samples were randomly allocated into two groups of 20 teeth, ensuring similar average curvatures. Root canal preparation was performed using either the ProTaper Next or Bassi Logic rotary file systems, strictly adhering to the manufacturers' protocols. CBCT images were acquired using a Kodak 9600 system (Care Stream, Paris, France), both before and after instrumentation. Canal transportation is a common procedural error during the preparation of curved canals. Statistical analysis was performed using an independent t-test to compare the two groups, with the significance level set at P < 0.05. Statistical analysis was performed using an independent t-test, with the significance level set at P < 0.05.
resultsThe ProTaper Next system demonstrated greater canal transportation and a lower centering ratio across all evaluated apical levels compared to the Bassi Logic system. Statistically significant differences in canal transportation were observed at the 3 mm level in the mesiodistal plane and at the 5 mm level in the buccolingual direction (P < 0.05). However, no statistically significant differences in centering ratio were found between the two systems at any of the evaluated levels (P > 0.05).
conclusionsWithin the limitations of this in vitro study, both systems demonstrated acceptable shaping ability in curved canals; however, Bassi Logic showed less canal transportation at certain apical levels, which may support better preservation of canal anatomy in clinical practice.
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.