Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35211465›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2022

Regenerative Endodontics and Minimally Invasive Dentistry: Intertwining Paths Crossing Over Into Clinical Translation.

Hisham Elnawam, Menatallah Abdelmougod, Ahmed Mobarak, Mai Hussein, Hamdy Aboualmakarem, Michael Girgis, Rania El Backly

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. METTL3-Mediated lncSNHG7 mJournal of clinical medicine · 2022
    Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

7 authors.

Hisham ElnawamEndodontics, Conservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.
Menatallah AbdelmougodEndodontics, Conservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.
Ahmed MobarakEndodontics, Conservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.
Mai HusseinEndodontics, Conservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.
Hamdy AboualmakaremEndodontics, Conservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.
Michael GirgisEndodontics, Conservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.
Rania El BacklyEndodontics, Conservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Regenerative endodontic procedures have been described for over a decade as a paradigm shift in the treatment of immature necrotic permanent teeth, owing to their ability to allow root maturation with subsequent enhancement of the tooth's fracture resistance in addition to the potential for regeneration of vital intracanal tissues. Concomitantly, minimally invasive endodontics is another rising concept with the main concern of preservation of tooth structure. Stemming from their potential to preserve the original tooth structure, both regenerative and minimally invasive endodontics could be considered as two revolutionary sciences with one common goal. Achieving this goal would entail not only employing the appropriate strategies to recreate the ideal regenerative niche but modifying existing concepts and protocols currently being implemented in regenerative endodontics to address two important challenges affecting the outcome of these procedures; conservation of tooth structure and achieving effective disinfection. Therefore, the search for new biomimetic cell-friendly disinfecting agents and strategies is crucial if such a novel integratory concept is to be foreseen in the future. This could be attainable by advocating a new merged concept of "minimally invasive regenerative endodontic procedures (MIREPs)," through modifying the clinical protocol of REPs by incorporating a minimally invasive access cavity design/preparation and biomimetic disinfection protocol, which could enhance clinical treatment outcomes and in the future; allow for personalized disinfection/regeneration protocols to further optimize the outcomes of MIREPs. In this review, we aim to introduce this new concept, its realization and challenges along with future perspectives for clinical implementation.

Indexed as

biomimetic disinfection protocolsbiomimetic scaffoldsimmature necrotic permanent teethminimally invasive endodonticsregenerative endodontic proceduresstem cellstooth structure preservation

Identifiers

PMID35211465
PMCPMC8860982

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.