Survival and periapical health after root canal treatment with carrier‐based root fillings: five‐year retrospective assessment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: This retrospective study explored survival and periapical healing outcomes in teeth root filled with Thermafil obturators. METHODOLOGY: Root canals of 213 teeth (94 subjects, mean age 48 ± 13 years), instrumented with a step-down technique, irrigated with 5% NaOCl and 10% EDTA and filled with Thermafil and AH Plus sealer, were involved in a recall programme. Teeth were retrospectively re-examined after 5 ± 1 years in a controlled environment. Clinical and radiographic data that were collected included the following: preoperative Periapical Index (PAI) score and signs/symptoms, treatment type, root filling length and presence/absence of voids, restoration type, follow-up PAI score and signs/symptoms. Teeth were considered 'healthy' (PAI ≤ 2, no signs/symptoms) or 'diseased' (PAI ≥ 3, signs/symptoms present, retreated, extracted for endodontic reasons). Two PAI-calibrated examiners assessed outcomes blinded to preoperative status. Bivariate and multilevel analyses were performed at level of patient and tooth (α = 5%). RESULTS: Of 213 teeth treated, 187 (88%) survived and 26 were extracted, six (3%) for persistent endodontic infection (considered 'diseased'), and 20 (9%) for root fracture, periodontal disease or coronal fracture (excluded from analysis). Whilst survival was significantly associated with tooth type (P = 0.015), type of treatment (P = 0.012) and pulpal/periapical diagnosis (P = 0.035), none of these variables were substantiated as survival predictors by the multilevel analysis. A total of 164 of 193 teeth (85%) were assessed as 'healthy', with significantly higher (chi-square; P < 0.04) 'healthy' rates for teeth with PAI score ≤2 and root fillings of adequate length. Multilevel analysis identified PAI score ≤2 (P = 0.002) as the only predictor of periapical health. CONCLUSIONS: In this 5 ± 1 year retrospective assessment, survival and healing rates after root canal treatment with Thermafil root fillings were comparable to those previously reported for conventional root filling techniques.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".