Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42404618›Full record

ArticleJournal of oral biology and craniofacial research

Retreatability of root canals filled with gutta percha and a novel bioceramic sealer- a scanning electron microscopy study.

Dsv Sindhuja, Prashant Bhasin, Hemanshi Kumar, Alfredo Iandolo, Dina Abdellatif, Lubna Ahmad, Alfonso Acerra

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of oral biology and craniofacial research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Dsv SindhujaDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Sudha Rustagi College of Dental Sciences and Research, Affiliated to Pandit B.D. Sharma University of Health Sciences and Research, Haryana, India.
Prashant BhasinDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Sudha Rustagi College of Dental Sciences and Research, Affiliated to Pandit B.D. Sharma University of Health Sciences and Research, Haryana, India.
Hemanshi KumarDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Sudha Rustagi College of Dental Sciences and Research, Affiliated to Pandit B.D. Sharma University of Health Sciences and Research, Haryana, India.
Alfredo IandoloFaculty of Dental Surgery, University of Marie and Louis Pasteur, Besancon, France.
Dina AbdellatifFaculty of Dental Surgery, University of Marie and Louis Pasteur, Besancon, France.
Lubna AhmadDepartment of Dentistry, Hamdard Institute of Medical Sciences and Research and Hahc Hospital, India.
Alfonso AcerraDepartment of Medicine, Surgery and Dentistry, University of Salerno, Baronissi, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To compare effectiveness of 5% acetic acid, 10% formic acid, and chloroform used adjunctively with a rotary retreatment system in removing a premixed calcium-silicate sealer (Ceraseal) and gutta-percha from root canals, using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) to quantify residuals across canal thirds. Materials and methods: Thirty-six extracted single-rooted anterior teeth were instrumented, obturated (single-cone GP + Ceraseal), and stored for two weeks. Specimens were retreated with HyFlex Remover files and randomly assigned (n = 9/group) to: G1-5% acetic acid; G2- 10% formic acid; G3-chloroform; G4-distilled water (negative control). Two milliliters of test solution were used with repeated instrumentation until patency; canals were then irrigated with saline and dried. Roots were split; standardized SEM images (×1000) of coronal, middle, and apical thirds were scored. Results: Intragroup, residuals increased apically in all solvent groups: in G1, apical > middle > coronal (all p = 0.021); in G2, apical > coronal/middle (p = 0.021); in G3, apical > coronal (p = 0.021); G4 showed no significant intragroup differences. Intergroup, coronal third: G1 had significantly lower residuals than G3 and G4; G1 ≈ G2; G2 ≈ G3 ≈ G4. Middle third: G1 and G2 < G4 (p = 0.021); no other pairwise differences. Apical third: no significant between-group differences. Conclusions: When combined with HyFlex Remover files, 5% acetic and 10% formic acids enhanced removal of Ceraseal/gutta-percha, particularly in coronal third; 5% acetic outperformed chloroform coronally. In middle and apical thirds, acidic solvents, chloroform, and water yielded broadly comparable outcomes.

Indexed as

Acetic acidCerasealChloroformFormic acidHyFlex removerRetreatment

Identifiers

PMID42404618
PMCPMC13331973

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.