ArticleBrazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology]2023
Comparative antimicrobial activity of four different endodontic sealers.
Article in Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology], 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of the physicochemical properties and adhesive interface quality of BioRoot Flow and BioRoot RCS endodontic sealers: An in vitro study.Clinical oral investigations · 2026Article
- A New Disinfection Approach Using a Chitosan-Based Endodontic Irrigant.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Bioactivity and physicochemical characterization of Centella asiatica and Marigold extract serums: Antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, anti-tyrosinase and skin barrier function insights.International journal of cosmetic science · 2025Article
- Article
- Physicochemical and Antimicrobial Properties of Bioceramic Sealer Enhanced with Silver Nanoparticles: An in vitro Evaluation.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dentistry · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Dental cements are widely used in the clinical routine, specifically for root canal sealing. Within this context, it is expected that these materials present antimicrobial activity, since it would help in the prevention of apical and periapical infections. The present study aimed to comparatively verify the antimicrobial activity of four dental cements against microorganisms that are routinely isolated from endodontic infections. Reference strains of Enterococcus faecalis, Candida albicans and Escherichia coli were submitted to the agar diffusion test and to modified direct contact test using four different sealers: an eugenol zinc oxide compound, an epoxy resin associated to calcium hydroxide and bismuth, a mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) and a bioceramics. Different E. coli, C. albicans and E. faecalis growth inhibition profiles were observed in the agar diffusion assay. In the direct contact test, the bioceramics presented a higher microbicide activity on all microorganisms tested herein. Dental cements have different antimicrobial activities, being that the bioceramics present the most consistent antimicrobial activity, and that the direct contact test presented more uniform results than the agar diffusion test. This study reveals the antimicrobial activities of different cements and allow dentists to decide which material to employ in their daily practice.
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.