ArticleJournal of periodontology2025
Laser and scanning electron microscopy evaluation of residual microislands of calculus.
Article in Journal of periodontology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of Adjunctive EDTA and Air-Polishing Powders on Periodontitis-Affected Root Surfaces: A SEM Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- The Reevaluation of Subgingival Calculus: A Narrative Review.Dentistry journal · 2025Review
- Laser and scanning electron microscopy evaluation of residual microislands of calculus.Journal of periodontology · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRecent studies suggest a role for microscopic crystalline particles of residual dental calculus in the pathogenesis of periodontitis. The purpose of this ex vivo study was to compare the effectiveness of scaling and root planing (SRP) alone versus SRP combined with 24% ethylenediamine-tetra acetic acid (EDTA) gel in removing calculus from extracted teeth and to determine the optimal length of time for application of the EDTA.
methodsSpecimens consisted of 32 extracted teeth with heavy root calculus. A 4-mm diameter site was prepared on the root surface of each tooth which then underwent SRP. EDTA was applied to four timed groups: 30 s; 60 s; 120 s; and 180 s. Photomicrographs were taken at 40× magnification using white light (WL) and laser fluorescence (LF). Photomicrographs were analyzed using ImageJ. Specimens were also evaluated with scanning electron microscopy (SEM).
resultsThe mean area of residual calculus after SRP was 45%-53% (45.6% ± 19.6% WL, 53.8% ± 19.7% LF). Burnishing with EDTA for one minute following SRP reduced calculus to only 14%-18% (13.9% ± 12.5% LF, 18.2% ± 11.1% WL). Use of EDTA for greater than 1 min showed no further calculus removal. SEM revealed the surface of remaining calculus was altered by burnishing with EDTA.
conclusionSRP alone or SRP + 24% EDTA gel failed to remove all calculus. SRP alone removed >60% of calculus from root surfaces. Adjunctive use of 24% EDTA gel burnished on the root surface removed most of the calculus residual after SRP. Calculus remaining after EDTA burnishing exhibited a significantly altered morphologic appearance.
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.