Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27173580›Full record

Trial reportClinical oral investigations2017

Comparison of ozone gas and sodium hypochlorite/chlorhexidine two-visit disinfection protocols in treating apical periodontitis: a randomized controlled clinical trial.

Stefan Kist, Maximilian Kollmuss, Jette Jung, Sören Schubert, Reinhard Hickel, Karin Christine Huth

Abstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical oral investigations, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Journal of International Society of Preventive & Community Dentistry
    Review
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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Stefan KistDepartment of Restorative Dentistry, Periodontology & Paedodontics, Ludwig Maximilians University, Goethestrasse 70, 80336, Munich, Germany.
Maximilian KollmussDepartment of Restorative Dentistry, Periodontology & Paedodontics, Ludwig Maximilians University, Goethestrasse 70, 80336, Munich, Germany.
Jette JungMax-von-Pettenkofer Institute for Hygiene and Clinical Microbiology, Ludwig Maximilians University, Munich, Germany.
Sören SchubertMax-von-Pettenkofer Institute for Hygiene and Clinical Microbiology, Ludwig Maximilians University, Munich, Germany.
Reinhard HickelDepartment of Restorative Dentistry, Periodontology & Paedodontics, Ludwig Maximilians University, Goethestrasse 70, 80336, Munich, Germany.
Karin Christine HuthDepartment of Restorative Dentistry, Periodontology & Paedodontics, Ludwig Maximilians University, Goethestrasse 70, 80336, Munich, Germany. khuth@dent.med.uni-muenchen.de.
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DEInstitute of Medical Microbiology and Hygiene · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesIn this single-blinded, prospective, randomized, controlled clinical trial, the effectiveness of an ozone gas or NaOCl/CHX disinfection protocol was compared within the root canal treatment of apical periodontitis. MATERIALS AND

methodsSixty permanent teeth were randomly allocated to one technique. The clinical/radiographic assessment criteria included clinical symptoms, periapical index (PAI), and size of the apical lesion. In both groups, the root canal was mechanically cleaned and irrigated with NaCl and EDTA. Ozone gas (32 g m

resultsThere were no significant differences between the success rates (ozone group: 96.2/95.5 % after 6/12 months; NaOCl group: 95.5/95.2 % after 6/12 months). The differences in the decreases in PAI values and apical lesion sizes were also insignificant after 6 and 12 months. The bacterial reduction showed no significant differences between groups after chemo-mechanical treatment and after inter-appointment dressing. The most commonly found bacterial genera were Streptococcus spp., Parvimonas spp. and Prevotella spp.

conclusionsThe here used ozone gas and NaOCl/CHX protocols showed no difference in bacterial reduction in the sampled areas of the root canals. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Within the limitations of the study, ozone gas seems to be a possible alternative disinfection agent within the root canal treatment of apical periodontitis.

Indexed as

Root Canal TherapyAnti-Infective Agents, LocalChlorhexidineDisinfectantsDisinfectionFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOzonePeriapical PeriodontitisPolymerase Chain ReactionProspective StudiesSingle-Blind MethodSodium HypochloriteSpectrometry, Mass, Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption-IonizationAnti-Infective Agents, LocalChlorhexidineDisinfectantsOzoneSodium HypochloriteApical periodontitisDisinfectionEndodonticsOzoneRCTSodium hypochlorite

Identifiers

PMID27173580
OpenAlexW2360198911

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.