Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35784137›Full record

ArticleJournal of dental sciences2022

Influence of pecking frequency at working length on the volume of apically extruded debris: A micro-computed tomography analysis.

Li-Xiao Wang, Hui Chen, Rui-Tian Lin, Li-Sha Gu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of dental sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

4 authors.

Li-Xiao WangHospital of Stomatology, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Hui ChenHospital of Stomatology, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Rui-Tian LinHospital of Stomatology, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Li-Sha GuHospital of Stomatology, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background/purpose: There is no consensus to date on how many repetitive pecking motions at working length (WL) should be regarded as optimal during instrumentation. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the effect of pecking frequency at WL on the volume of apically extruded debris using three single-file systems in curved, oval-shaped canals. Materials and methods: Forty-five single-rooted mandibular premolars with curved, oval-shaped canals were prescanned by micro-computed tomography, anatomically paired-matched, and randomly divided among three groups (n = 15 each): Reciproc Blue (RB), WaveOne Gold (WOG) and XP-endo Shaper (XPS). Samples were embedded in agarose gel to collect extruded debris. After preparation to the WL, each sample was rescanned after one, two, four, 10, and 20 pecking motions at WL, respectively. The debris volume was innovatively calculated by a modification of an existing method using micro-computed tomography. The apical preparation size was also measured. Data were compared using a two-way repeated-measures analysis of variance. Results: All single-file systems extruded debris apically, irrespective of the pecking frequency at WL. The extruded debris volume correlated positively with the minor foramen size ( Conclusion: To produce less debris extrusion and obtain a predictable foramen size corresponding to the instrument tip size, a single pecking motion may be preferred when using single-file systems. Caution should be exercised when applying the current results to clinical situations.

Indexed as

Dental instrumentsEndodonticsMicro-computed tomographyRoot canal preparation

Identifiers

PMID35784137
PMCPMC9236894

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.