ArticleInternational journal of dentistry2023
Efficacy of Different Irrigant Activation Systems on Debris and Smear Layer Removal: A Scanning Electron Microscopy Evaluation.
Article in International journal of dentistry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative efficacy of irrigation activation systems in root canal cleanliness: a region-specific analysis of debris and smear layer removal.Lasers in medical science · 2026Article
- Study on bubble fluid dynamics of ultrasound-activated irrigation in apical region of root canal.Odontology · 2026Article
- Penetration effect of sodium hypochlorite activated by the NSKVarios 370 ultrasonic system and the EQ-S sonic system in singlerooted premolars.Acta odontologica latinoamericana : AOL · 2026Article
- Comparative Evaluation of Polymeric and Metal Ultrasonic Tips for the Removal of Calcium Hydroxide From Root Canals.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2026Article
- Dentinal tubule penetration of sodium hypochlorite and super-oxidized water using diode laser and passive ultrasonic activation: an in vitro confocal laser scanning microscopy study.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Evaluation of smear layer removal using polymer and metal tips of ultrasonic irrigation device: an in vitro study.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Internally Heated Sodium Hypochlorite for Endodontic Irrigation: A Narrative Review of Efficacy and Clinical Applicability.European endodontic journal · 2025Review
- Comparative analysis of dentinal tubule penetration: effects of irrigation activation methods and root canal sealers: in-vitro study.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- The influence of cavity configuration and irrigation activation on root canal smear removal-anPeerJ · 2025Article
- Article
- Debris and Smear Layer Removal in Curved Root Canals: A Comparative Study of Ultrasonic and Sonic Irrigant Activation Techniques.Dentistry journal · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Irrigation is an essential component of root canal treatment to enable cleaning beyond the reach of mechanical instruments. The study aimed to assess and compare the efficacy of different final irrigation protocols, including sonic- and ultrasonic-powered irrigant-activation systems, on debris and smear layer removal in the coronal, middle, and apical thirds of straight oval root canals. Materials and Methods: Straight oval root canals of 60 human mandibular incisors were prepared to size 40.04 and divided into four groups ( Results: None of the final irrigation protocols completely removed all debris and smear layer from all root canals. When the syringe and needle were used without activation, more debris and smear layer were found in the apical third of the canals. Activation of the final irrigant with each of the three devices significantly reduced the presence of debris in the apical third, compared to the syringe and needle final irrigation, with no difference among the three activation devices. Eddy and irrisafe activation also significantly reduced the residual smear layer in the apical third, compared to syringe and needle alone, while the reduction in the remaining smear layer by endosonic activation did not reach the significance level. Conclusions: Removal of debris and smear layer from the apical part of the root canal by syringe and needle irrigation alone may be significantly improved by using sonic or ultrasonic activation of the final irrigant. Endosonic activation was less effective in removal of smear layer from the apical part of the canals compared to the other two activation systems.
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.