Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34795397›Full record

ReviewEvidence-based dentistry2021

Removal of accumulated hard tissue debris from mesial root of mandibular molars evaluated using micro-CT - a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Velmurugan Natanasabapathy, Buvaneshwari Arul, Vignesh Srinivasan, Sneha Susan Santosh, Aishwarya Vasudevan, Selva Arockiam, Ambalavanan Namasivayam, Kandaswamy Deivanayagam, M R Srinivasan

Erratum issuedAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Evidence-based dentistry, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 31% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Velmurugan NatanasabapathyDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Meenakshi Ammal Dental College & Hospital, Meenakshi Academy of Higher Education and Research (MAHER), No.1, Alapakkam Main Road, Maduravoyal, Chennai, 600095, Tamil Nadu, India. vel9911@yahoo.com.
Buvaneshwari ArulDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Meenakshi Ammal Dental College & Hospital, Meenakshi Academy of Higher Education and Research (MAHER), No.1, Alapakkam Main Road, Maduravoyal, Chennai, 600095, Tamil Nadu, India.
Vignesh SrinivasanDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Meenakshi Ammal Dental College & Hospital, Meenakshi Academy of Higher Education and Research (MAHER), No.1, Alapakkam Main Road, Maduravoyal, Chennai, 600095, Tamil Nadu, India.
Sneha Susan SantoshDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Meenakshi Ammal Dental College & Hospital, Meenakshi Academy of Higher Education and Research (MAHER), No.1, Alapakkam Main Road, Maduravoyal, Chennai, 600095, Tamil Nadu, India.
Aishwarya VasudevanDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Meenakshi Ammal Dental College & Hospital, Meenakshi Academy of Higher Education and Research (MAHER), No.1, Alapakkam Main Road, Maduravoyal, Chennai, 600095, Tamil Nadu, India.
Selva ArockiamDepartment of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Meenakshi Ammal Dental College & Hospital, Meenakshi Academy of Higher Education and Research (MAHER), No.1, Alapakkam Main Road, Maduravoyal, Chennai, 600095, Tamil Nadu, India.
Ambalavanan NamasivayamDepartment of Periodontology and Oral implantology, Faculty of Dentistry, Meenakshi Ammal Dental College & Hospital, Meenakshi Academy of Higher Education and Research (MAHER), No.1, Alapakkam Main Road, Maduravoyal, Chennai, 600095, Tamil Nadu, India.
Kandaswamy DeivanayagamDepartment of Conservative Dentistry & Endodontics, Faculty of Dental Sciences, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research, Chennai, 600116, Tamil Nadu, India.
M R SrinivasanDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Sri Venkateswara Dental College and Hospital, Chennai, 600130, Tamil Nadu, India.
Meenakshi Academy of Higher Education and Research · INMeenakshi Ammal Dental College and Hospital · INRagas Dental College & Hospital · INSri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aim The aim of this systematic review and network meta-analysis was to identify the best irrigant activation technique (IAT) for the removal of accumulated hard tissue debris (AHTD) from the mesial root of mandibular molars evaluated using micro-CT studies.Methods The research question was based on the PICO format. Four electronic databases - PubMed, Scopus, Embase and Web of Science - were searched for articles up to June 2020. Selected articles were assessed for bias using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical appraisal tool. The network meta-analysis using a fixed-effects model and SUCRA ranking were performed. The quality of the evidence was assessed using the CINeMA framework.Results Eleven studies were included for qualitative synthesis while seven were included for quantitative synthesis. The risk of bias of all included articles was low. The results based on SUCRA values revealed the IAT shock wave-enhanced emission photoacoustic streaming (100%) resulted in the greatest reduction of the volume of AHTD from mesial roots of mandibular molars. Ranking of the other IATs was as follows: photon-induced photoacoustic streaming (87%), laser-activated irrigation (79.3%), XP EndoFinisher (71.2%), ultrasonically activated irrigation (59.6%), apical negative pressure (42.3%), EasyClean (37.4%), EDDY (26.2%), EndoActivator (24.2%), self-adjusting file (11.6%) and needle irrigation (11.3%).Conclusion None of the IATs rendered the root canals completely free of AHTD. The laser-activated irrigation groups fared better than all other interventions in reducing AHTD from the mesial roots of mandibular molars. The confidence rating ranged from low to high for indirect evidence and moderate to high for mixed evidence. Results must be interpreted with caution due to the laboratory nature of the included studies.

Identifiers

PMID34795397
OpenAlexW3211344456

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.