ArticleOdontology2024
Irrigant dynamics of a back-to-back double side-vented needle in root canals with various tapers: a computational fluid dynamics study.
Article in Odontology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Efficiency of Four Irrigation Needles in Curved Simulated Root Canals.Dentistry journal · 2026Article
- Comparative evaluation of irrigant penetration up to working length and into lateral canals using side-vented needle, passive ultrasonic, and COXO's continuous rotary canal cleaning system.Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Understanding the apical pressure and irrigant flow patterns in root canals is crucial for safe and effective irrigation. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the flow characteristics of irrigants in root canal models with varying tapers during final irrigation by employing various needle designs, including a back-to-back double-side-vented needle, through computational fluid dynamics. The root canal model was configured as a closed geometrical cone with a simulated apical zone (size 30) and features tapers of 4%, 6%, and 8%. Three needle types-open-ended needle (OEN), single side-vented needle (SSVN), and double side-vented needle (DSVN)-were investigated. The results indicated that for the 4% taper models, the open-ended needle generated the maximum apical pressure, followed by the double side-vented needle and the single side-vented needle. However, in the 6% and 8% tapering root canal models, the double-side-vented needle applied the lowest maximum apical pressure. Consequently, the DSVN can pose a risk for irrigant extrusion in minimally prepared canals due to heightened apical pressure. In wider canals, the DSVN exhibited lower apical pressure. The maximum irrigant replacement was observed with OEN compared to that of the closed-ended group for both flow rates. Additionally, compared with OENs, closed-ended needles exhibited nonuniform and lower shear wall stress.
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.