ArticleCureus2024
The Effectiveness of Triton Used With XP-3D Adaptive Files and Active Irrigation on Smear Layer Removal During Root Canal Preparation: A Qualitative Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) Study.
Article in Cureus, 2024. 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.
- Performance of Electronic Apex Locators, Root ZX3, NovApex N31, and Apex-S, in Irrigant Solutions of Varying Conductivity.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2026Review
- Effect of Triton all-in-one irrigant on electronic working length determination using two apex locators: anPeerJ · 2026Article
- Effect of newer all-in-one irrigants on root dentin wettability and surface roughness - AnJournal 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStandard irrigating protocols during root canal treatment call for the use of sodium hypochlorite during chemo-mechanical preparation, followed by final irrigation with ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA). This study determined the effectiveness of a new irrigant, Triton (Brasseler, USA), on smear layer removal during root canal treatment compared to that of 5.25% sodium hypochlorite and CanalPro EDTA 17% (Coltene). METHODOLOGY: Twenty-one extracted anterior teeth were prepared for root canal treatment. The teeth were divided into three groups: five teeth were used as control with saline as the irrigant, eight teeth with sodium hypochlorite and 17% EDTA as irrigants, and eight teeth with Triton as the irrigant. Root canal preparation was done using the XP-3D shaper and finisher files (Brasseler, USA) for all teeth with respective irrigants. A single operator performed all root canal treatment procedures. The teeth were prepared for scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and analysis was performed by a second investigator. The smear layer removal was qualitatively assessed to determine the effectiveness of irrigants.
resultsSmear layer removal was most effective for teeth irrigated with 5.25% sodium hypochlorite, followed by 17% EDTA (Group B). Teeth irrigated with Triton (Group A) showed a similar appearance to the hypochlorite/EDTA group but with isolated instances of inter-tubular debris.
conclusionSodium hypochlorite use followed by a final rinse with EDTA remains the gold standard for the removal of the smear layer created during canal instrumentation.
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.