Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36187868›Full record

ArticleJournal of conservative dentistry : JCD

The effect of chitosan nanoparticle, citric acid, and ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid on dentin smear layer using two different irrigation needles: A scanning electron microscope study.

Esraa Raad Hussein, Biland M S Shukri, Raad H Ibrahim

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of conservative dentistry : JCD. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. 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

3 authors.

Esraa Raad HusseinMinistry Of Health, Baghdad, Republic of Iraq.
Biland M S ShukriDepartment of Conservative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Mustansiriyah University, Baghdad, Iraq.
Raad H IbrahimDepartment of Anesthesia, College of Medical Technology, University of Al- Farahidi, Baghdad, Iraq.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: The objective of this study is to compare the efficacy of chitosan (CS) nanoparticles (CNPs), citric acid (CA), and ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) in removing the smear layer using two different irrigation needles. Materials and Methods: Palatal roots of 70 maxillary first molars were decoronated, instrumented, and divided into four experimental groups ( Statistical Analysis Used: Nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney Results: CNPs were as efficient as CA and EDTA as a chelating agent. However, significantly more efficient apically. At all three levels, there was no significant difference between A1 and A2. At the coronal and middle levels, there was a significant difference between B1 and B2, as well as apically between C1 and C2. Conclusions: CNPs remove the smear layer with the same efficiency as other irrigants utilized in this study at coronal and middle levels and more efficiently at the apical levels. IrriFlex

Indexed as

Chitosan nanoparticlescitric acidethylenediaminetetraacetic acidIrriFlex®ProRinse®smear layer

Identifiers

PMID36187868
PMCPMC9520656

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.