ArticleJournal of clinical and experimental dentistry2021
Ultrasonic techniques to obtain dental pulp from impacted third molars.
Article in Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Comparative Efficacy of Burs Versus Piezoelectric Techniques in Third Molar Surgery: A Systematic Review Following the PRISMA Guidelines.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Pooled it
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
backgroundIn the dental clinic impacted teeth are frequent findings, especially upper and lower third molars, leading to their exodontia. Among surgical techniques piezosurgery is advantageous for delicate structures in the oral cavity. Extracted teeth, usually discarded, have been revalued as biological material, providing living tissues with possible applications in regenerative dentistry. The aim was to compare cross-section methods of upper included third molars by ultrasonic piezoelectric technique to obtain dental pulp, with diamond-coated tip (DT) against titanium nitride-coated tip (TN), according to the pulp tissue cell viability and the section surface characteristics. MATERIAL AND
methodsPatients attending dental consultation were evaluated. Upper third molars (n= 24) were avulsed from 15 patients with exodontia indication, age 18-26 years old, who agreed to participate of the study. Third molars were cross-sectioned at amelocemental junction level with piezoelectric device using DT or TN inserts. Pulps were mechanic and enzymatically treated, and tissue viability determined by Trypan Blue test. Sectioned teeth were visualized using Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM). Ethical principles of biomedical research were respected; all patients gave their informed consent.
resultsViability of pulp tissue was 84.71% not associated to sex (p= 0.141) nor to teeth position, upper right third molar or upper left third molar (p= 0.580). According to the insert used, pulp tissue viability was 85.21% with TN, similar to 84.00% with DT (p= 0.611). By SEM, cut performed by TN insert showed smooth and uniform surfaces, while DT insert surfaces were irregular, porous, with fissures.
conclusionsPiezosurgery applied to cross-section upper third molars with both types of inserts showed differences in the cut surfaces but similar effectiveness regarding preservation of pulp tissue with high viability, thus, they could be allocated for further cellular developments.
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.