ArticleLasers in medical science2024
Root surface roughness evaluation following application of different periodontal instruments and Er:YAG laser: A profilometry and SEM study.
Article in Lasers in medical science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThe aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy of 30
methodsEighteen bovine teeth root without carious lesion were decoronated from the cementoenamel junction and seperated longitidunally. A total of 36 obtained blocks were mounted in resin blocks and polished with silicon carbide papers under water irrigation. These blocks were randomly assigned into 3 treatment groups. In Group 1, 30°-angled Er:YAG laser (2.94 μm) tip was applied onto the blocks with a 20 Hz, 120 mJ energy output under water irrigation for 20 s. In Groups 2 and 3, the same treatment was applied to the blocks with new generation ultrasonic tip and conventional curette apico-coronally for 20 s with a sweeping motion. Surface roughness and morphology were evaluated before and after instrumentation with a profilometer and SEM, respectively.
resultsAfter instrumentation, profilometric analysis revealed significantly higher roughness values compared to baseline in all treatment groups(p < 0.05). Laser group revealed the roughest surface morphology followed by conventional curette and new generation ultrasonic tip treatment groups (p < 0.05). In SEM analysis, irregular surfaces and crater defects were seen more frequently in the laser group.
conclusionResults of the study showed that the use of new generation ultrasonic tip was associated with smoother surface morphology compared to 30°-angled Er-YAG laser tip and conventional curette. Further in vitro and in vivo studies with an increased sample size are necessary to support the present study findings.
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.