ArticleOdontology2025
Metronidazole-laden silk fibroin methacrylated scaffolds for managing periapical lesions.
Article in Odontology, 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.
- Bilayer gelatin-methacryloyl scaffold for pulp inflammation suppression and dentin-like tissue regeneration.Journal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society · 2026Article
- Coaxial electrospinning of poly(ɛ-caprolactone)/gelatin core-shell biodegradable implants for localized delivery of metronidazole and dexamethasone for periodontal applications.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Article
- Injectable thermosensitive antibiotic-laden chitosan hydrogel for regenerative endodontics.Bioactive materials · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study aimed to develop and characterize silk fibroin methacrylated/SilkMA electrospun scaffolds associated with metronidazole/MET to control infection in root-end resected periapical lesions while supporting bone regeneration. SilkMA-based formulations (10% w/v) incorporating MET (0-control; 5, 15, or 30% w/w) were electrospun into fibrous scaffolds and photocrosslinked. Scaffolds' morphology, chemical composition, swelling/degradation profiles, mechanical properties, cytocompatibility with alveolar bone-derived mesenchymal stem cells/aBMSCs and stem cells from apical papilla/SCAPs, anti-inflammatory potential, and antibacterial efficacy (direct contact assay against Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans/Aa and Fusobacterium nucleatum/Fn; Aa biofilm model) were assessed. Statistical analysis was conducted using a significance level of 5%. Morphological analysis revealed that MET content influenced fiber diameters post-crosslinking, while the chemical composition analysis confirmed MET integration within the scaffolds. 30%MET-laden scaffolds demonstrated reduced swelling capacity compared to SilkMA/control scaffolds, while complete degradation was observed after 42 days for the formulated scaffolds. Mechanical testing indicated enhanced stiffness and tensile strength in 30%MET-laden scaffolds compared to SilkMA/control (p < 0.05). Cytocompatibility evaluations showed non-cytotoxic effects across all formulations for aBMSCs and SCAPs. Anti-inflammatory assays demonstrated decreased pro-inflammatory cytokine interleukin-6 synthesis by aBMSCs treated with SilkMA + MET30% and Escherichia coli LPS, comparable to negative control (p > 0.05). Antibacterial efficacy assays revealed significant inhibition of Aa and Fn, with 30%MET-laden scaffolds demonstrating biofilm inhibition against Aa (p < 0.05). These findings underscore the potential of SilkMA scaffolds laden with MET as a promising strategy for managing periapical lesions, offering enhanced structural support, antimicrobial properties, and biocompatibility crucial for effective tissue regeneration and infection control after endodontic surgery.
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.