ArticleBMC oral health2026
Evaluation of radicular fracture resistance of maxillary premolars following non-surgical retreatment using two novel retreatment kits.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe structural integrity of teeth after endodontic retreatment depends on the amount of remaining dentin. Excessive instrumentation can weaken roots and predispose them to fracture. This study evaluated the fracture resistance of maxillary premolars following non-surgical retreatment (NS-ReT) with Retreaty and XP-endo Rise systems. MATERIALS AND
methodsForty-eight maxillary first premolar roots were randomly assigned to 4 groups (n = 12); G1-NC (Negative control, non-instrumented), G2-PC (Positive control, instrumented, not obturated), G3-RETY (Retreaty), and G4-XPER (XP-endo Rise). G2, G3 and G4 groups were prepared using the iRace system. Groups G3 and G4 were obturated with gutta-percha and resin sealer. Gutta percha removal was performed using Retreaty (G3-RETY) and XP-endo Rise retreatment files (G4-XPER). All samples were subjected to fracture testing using a universal testing machine & the maximum fracture load (N) was recorded. Gutta percha removal times (Tf) and total time of retreatment were also measured. Statistical analysis was performed using a mixed-model analysis of variance (ANOVA) (α = 0.05).
resultsThe fracture resistance of G1-NC (942.92 ± 24.73 N) had significantly higher values compared to all other groups. Fracture values for the G2-PC (829.62 ± 71.55 N) and the G3-RETY (818.29 ± 73.14 N) did not significantly differ from each other (p = 1.000), but both were significantly higher than the G4-XPER (489.37 ± 33.47 N). The total time of retreatment was significantly reduced when using the G3-RETY (3.89 ± 0.84 min) compared to the G4-XPER (13.30 ± 2.05 min), p < .001.
conclusionsTeeth retreated using the Retreaty instruments demonstrated superior fracture resistance compared to XP-endo Rise and their values were comparable to the positive control group. Moreover, Retreaty file system showed faster gutta-percha removal and canal preparation during retreatments.
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.