Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32846942›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2020

Antimicrobial Effectiveness of Calcium Silicate Sealers against a Nutrient-Stressed Multispecies Biofilm.

Rahul Bose, Konstantinos Ioannidis, Federico Foschi, Abdulaziz Bakhsh, Robert D Kelly, Sanjukta Deb, Francesco Mannocci, Sadia Ambreen Niazi

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Rahul BoseCentre for Host Microbiome Interactions, King's College London Dental Institute, Floor 17, Tower Wing, Guy's Dental Hospital, London Bridge, London SE1 9RT, UK.
Konstantinos IoannidisCentre for Host Microbiome Interactions, King's College London Dental Institute, Floor 17, Tower Wing, Guy's Dental Hospital, London Bridge, London SE1 9RT, UK.
Federico FoschiCentre for Host Microbiome Interactions, King's College London Dental Institute, Floor 17, Tower Wing, Guy's Dental Hospital, London Bridge, London SE1 9RT, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6901-0280
Abdulaziz BakhshCentre for Host Microbiome Interactions, King's College London Dental Institute, Floor 17, Tower Wing, Guy's Dental Hospital, London Bridge, London SE1 9RT, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3228-2025
Robert D KellyCentre for Host Microbiome Interactions, King's College London Dental Institute, Floor 17, Tower Wing, Guy's Dental Hospital, London Bridge, London SE1 9RT, UK.
Sanjukta DebCentre for Host Microbiome Interactions, King's College London Dental Institute, Floor 17, Tower Wing, Guy's Dental Hospital, London Bridge, London SE1 9RT, UK.
Francesco MannocciCentre for Host Microbiome Interactions, King's College London Dental Institute, Floor 17, Tower Wing, Guy's Dental Hospital, London Bridge, London SE1 9RT, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0560-1054
Sadia Ambreen NiaziCentre for Host Microbiome Interactions, King's College London Dental Institute, Floor 17, Tower Wing, Guy's Dental Hospital, London Bridge, London SE1 9RT, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0334-4119
King's College London · GBSechenov University · RU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis study compared the antimicrobial efficacy of calcium silicate sealers (BioRoot RCS and Total Fill BC) and conventional sealers (AH Plus and Tubli-seal) against planktonic bacteria and a nutrient-stressed multispecies biofilm.

methodsAntimicrobial properties of freshly mixed sealers were investigated using the direct contact test (DCT) and a nutrient-stressed multispecies biofilm comprised of five endodontic strains. Antimicrobial activity was determined using quantitative viable counts and confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM) analysis with live/dead staining. The pH of the sealers was analysed over a period of 28 days in Hanks Balanced Salt Solution (HBSS). Analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Tukey tests and the Kruskal-Wallis test were used for data analysis with a significance of 5%.

resultsAll endodontic sealers exhibited significant antimicrobial activity against planktonic bacteria (

conclusionsCalcium silicate sealers exhibited effective antimicrobial properties. This was demonstrated by superior biofilm inhibition capacity and microbial killing, with strong alkalizing activity compared to epoxy-based and zinc oxide-eugenol-based sealers.

Indexed as

antimicrobial propertiesbioceramic sealersbiofilmscalcium silicate sealersconfocal laser scanning microscopydental materialsendodontic sealers

Identifiers

PMID32846942
PMCPMC7563851
OpenAlexW3081036224

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.