Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42467664›Full record

ArticlePloS one2026

Comparative evaluation of root canal obturation techniques and sealers in Diabetic Dentin: An in-vitro push-out bond strength test.

Mevlüt Sinan Ocak, Mehmet Eskibağlar, Mustafa Gündoğar

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2026. 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

3 authors.

Mevlüt Sinan OcakFirat University, Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Endodontics, Elazig, Turkey.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3121-2116
Mehmet EskibağlarFirat University, Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Endodontics, Elazig, Turkey.
Mustafa GündoğarDepartment of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Istanbul Medipol University, Istanbul, Turkey.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study evaluated the comparative performance of different root canal obturation approaches using different sealing materials on the push-out bond strength of dentin samples obtained from patients with diabetes mellitus (DM). Forty single-rooted mandibular premolars were instrumented using the Reciproc R40 system and randomly assigned to four groups (n = 10 teeth each): (1) cold lateral compaction with AH Plus, (2) warm vertical compaction with AH Plus, (3) hydraulic single-cone obturation with gutta-percha and Bioserra sealer, and (4) sealer-only technique using the Bioserra bioceramic sealer. After storage at 37°C and 100% humidity for one week, 1-mm slices were prepared from the coronal, middle, and apical thirds and subjected to push-out testing. Data were analyzed using ANOVA and Tukey's test (p < 0.05). Significant differences in push-out bond strength were observed among the obturation approaches using different sealer materials (p < 0.05). Bioceramic sealers exhibited higher bond strengths than epoxy resin-based sealers, particularly in the middle and apical thirds. Hydraulic single-cone and bioceramic sealer-only approaches outperformed conventional techniques (p < 0.001), whereas no significant difference was observed between cold lateral and warm vertical compaction techniques. Obturation approaches employing bioceramic sealers demonstrated superior bonding in diabetic dentin, suggesting potential advantages over conventional methods in the context of diabetic dentin.

Indexed as

DentinRoot Canal Filling MaterialsRoot Canal ObturationDental BondingEpoxy ResinsGutta-PerchaHumansMaterials TestingEpoxy ResinsGutta-PerchaRoot Canal Filling Materials

Identifiers

PMID42467664
PMCPMC13378988

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.