Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35812584›Full record

ArticleCureus2022

Microbial Culture and Scanning Electron Microscopic Evaluation of Endodontic Hand Files: An In Vitro Study.

Ahmad H Almehmadi, Faisal T Alghamdi

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 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
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ahmad H AlmehmadiOral Biology, Faculty of Dentistry, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, SAU.
Faisal T AlghamdiOral Biology, Faculty of Dentistry, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, SAU.
King Abdulaziz University · SA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Endodontic hand files are used during root canal treatment in the cleaning and shaping step of the procedure. Whether endodontic instruments should be single-use or reusable is a topic of debate. This in vitro study aimed to analyze the bioburden on used and new sterilized endodontic hand files. Methodology A total of 30 K-files (15 used, 15 new) and 30 H-files (15 used, 15 new) were studied. After clinical use, the used and new files were subjected to phloxine B staining, scanning electron microscope (SEM) analysis, and microbial culture. We used a Fisher's exact test to investigate the significant difference in contamination and bioburden between new and used endodontic files. Results The chi-square test showed no statistically significant difference between new and used groups in staining. In the used group, 20% of the H-files and 6.7% of the K-files were positive for bioburden (p > 0.05). The SEM analysis showed that all used files (100%) were contaminated with biological debris. All new files and most of the used files (86.7%) were negative for bacterial culture. Conclusions Used K-files and H-files (sizes 25 and below) had greater contamination and bioburden than new files. Our results highlight the inadequacy of cleaning methods (mechanical/ultrasonication pre-cleaning and heat sterilization) employed between re-usage of files in this study. Appropriate decision-making on either adapting an evidence-based and effective reprocessing strategy or single-use files can be considered by dentists.

Indexed as

cleaningendodontic filesinfection controlreuse of filessterilization

Identifiers

PMID35812584
PMCPMC9256005
OpenAlexW4281652337

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.