Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34107959›Full record

SynthesisBMC oral health2021

Effectiveness of XP-Endo Finisher and passive ultrasonic irrigation on intracanal medicament removal from root canals: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Jiani Zhou, Tingjun Liu, Lihong Guo

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC oral health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

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

Jiani ZhouHospital of Stomatology, Guanghua School of Stomatology, Sun Yat-Sen University, 56 Lingyuanxi Road, Guangzhou, 510055, China.
Tingjun LiuHospital of Stomatology, Guanghua School of Stomatology, Sun Yat-Sen University, 56 Lingyuanxi Road, Guangzhou, 510055, China.
Lihong GuoHospital of Stomatology, Guanghua School of Stomatology, Sun Yat-Sen University, 56 Lingyuanxi Road, Guangzhou, 510055, China. guolh5@mail.sysu.edu.cn.ORCID 0000-0002-1241-4556

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 81670982
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundXP-Endo Finisher (XPF) and passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI) are commonly used in intracanal medicament removal. The effectiveness of these two techniques needs to be compared, and evidence-based research should be conducted.

methodsA comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar up to December 20th, 2020. The outcomes of the included trials were pooled into the Cochrane Collaboration's Review Manager 5.3 software. Cochrane's risk-of-bias tool 2.0 was applied to assess the risk of bias.

resultsNine articles were included in this systematic review and processed for data extraction, and eight studies were identified for meta-analysis. In general, the use of PUI showed better medicament removal effectiveness than XPF (odds ratio [OR]: 3.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.96-4.86; P < 0.001). PUI was also significantly more efficient than XPF in the apical third (OR: 3.42; 95% CI, 1.32-8.84; P = 0.01). For trials using sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) alone, PUI was also significantly more effective than XPF on intracanal medicaments removal (OR: 5.23; 95% CI, 2.79-9.82; P < 0.001). However, there was no significant difference between PUI and XPF when NaOCl and ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) were used in combination (OR: 1.51; 95% CI, 0.74-3.09; P = 0.26). In addition, for studies whose intracanal medicament periods were two weeks, the effectiveness of PUI was statistically better than the XPF (OR: 7.73; 95% CI, 3.71-16.07; P < 0.001). Nevertheless, for trials whose intracanal medicament time was one week or over two weeks, no differences between the XPF and PUI were found (OR: 1.54; 95% CI, 0.74-3.22; P = 0.25) (OR: 1.42; 95% CI, 0.44-4.61; P = 0.56).

conclusionsThe meta-analysis is the first study to quantitatively compare the effectiveness of XPF and PUI techniques on intracanal medicaments removal. With rigorous eligibility criteria, the study only included high-quality randomised controlled trials. The study indicated that PUI might be superior over XPF techniques for removing intracanal medicaments from artificial standardized grooves and cavities in the root canal system. The anatomical areas, irrigation protocol, and intracanal medicaments time may influence the cleaning efficacy.

Indexed as

Dental Pulp CavityUltrasonicsHumansRoot Canal IrrigantsRoot Canal PreparationSodium HypochloriteTherapeutic IrrigationRoot Canal IrrigantsSodium HypochloriteEndodonticsIntracanal medicament removalMeta-analysisPassive ultrasonic irrigationRoot canal therapyXP-endo Finisher

Identifiers

PMID34107959
PMCPMC8191128

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.