ArticleEuropean endodontic journal2024
Effectiveness of Triton Irrigation Solution in Smear Layer Removal: An in-vitro Study.
Article in European endodontic journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Smear layer removal and antimicrobial efficacy of chitosan as a root canal irrigant: a systematic review of in-vitro studies.Odontology · 2025Pooled it
- Effect of Novel All-in-One Root Canal Irrigants on Dislodgement Resistance of Epoxy Resin and Hydraulic Calcium Silicate Sealers: An Ex vivo Study.European journal of dentistry · 2026Article
- Article
- Evaluation of the effect of novel all-in-one irrigating solutions with and without diode laser activation on the radicular dentine composition: AnJournal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 2026Article
- Effect of newer all-in-one irrigants on root dentin wettability and surface roughness - AnJournal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 2025Article
- Comparisons of the smear layer removal efficacy of dual-action irrigants and different activation techniques.Journal of dental sciences · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis in vitro study aimed to compare and evaluate the effectiveness of different irrigation solutions, including Triton, 0.5% Chitosan nanoparticles (CNP), and 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA), on the smear layer removal of the root canal walls.
methodsForty extracted sound mandibular premolars were examined; the samples were decoronated to obtain a root length of 14 mm. Each sample was instrumented using ProTaper Next rotary file X4 (40/0.06). The samples were longitudinally sectioned and examined under a scanning electron microscope at 3000x magnification in the coronal, middle, and apical thirds using a four-level scoring system.
resultsTriton demonstrated the lowest mean smear layer removal (p>0.05) compared to the other irrigation solutions at all the levels of the root canal. No significant differences were observed (p>0.05) at the coronal and middle levels of the root canal between the CNP and EDTA groups. CNP demonstrated significantly more smear layer removal at the apical level compared to EDTA.
conclusionSmear layer removal was least effective with Triton at all the levels of the root canal compared to the other irrigation solutions tested in this study. CNP demonstrated superior smear layer removal at the apical level compared to the other irrigation solutions.
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.