ArticleBrazilian dental journal
Ultrasound device as a minimally invasive approach for caries dentin removal.
Article in Brazilian dental journal. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enhanced Clinical Decision-Making and Delivery of Minimally Invasive Care Using the ICCMS4D Integrated with Hands-Free Fluorescence-Based Loupes and a Chemomechanical Caries Removal Agent.European journal of dentistry · 2023Article
- Using Antimicrobial Photodynamic Therapy with Ultrasound Devices and Bioactive Glasses as a Combined Approach for Treating Dentin Caries Lesions.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Micro-CT analysis and leakage of bioceramic retrofillings after ultrasonic and Er:YAG laser cavity preparations: an in vitro study.Lasers in medical science · 2023Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of an ultrasound device and the dentin surface morphology after removal of the caries dentin lesions by removal rate and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The Knoop hardness test on the bovine dentin blocks (n = 20, 4x4x2mm) was performed to standardize the samples and only those with 38 ± 2 KHN were included. The dentin blocks were submitted to induction of artificial caries lesions, using the bacterial model. Strains of Streptococcus mutans and Lactobacillus acidophilus were used for 7 days. The caries dentin lesion was removed for 1 min, according to two methods: G1 - carbide bur under low-speed rotation (control group) and G2 - ultrasound device under refrigeration. For the removal rate, the samples were weighed 3 times: T0 (before induction), T1 (after induction) and T2 (after removal). Morphology evaluation of the residual dentin surface was performed by SEM. Data normality was verified by Shapiro-Wilk test (p ≥ 0.240). T-test for independent samples was applied to evaluate the removal rate. A significance level of 5% was adopted. G2 provided lower removal rate than G1 (G1: 3.68 mg and G2 = 2.26 mg). SEM images showed different morphological characteristics between the groups. G2 showed absent of smear layer, while G1 showed a visible smear layer over the surface. We concluded that ultrasound device provides minimally invasive removal with residual dentin exhibiting open dentin tubules and no smear layer formation and no bacteria, which infer the removal of the infected tissue.
Indexed as
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.