ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2024
The effect of different activation irrigations on intracanal smear layer removal: a vitro study.
Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative efficacy of irrigation activation systems in root canal cleanliness: a region-specific analysis of debris and smear layer removal.Lasers in medical science · 2026Article
- Effect of Irrigation with Zirconia Microparticles Combined with Different Activation Techniques on Smear Layer Removal: An Ex Vivo Study.Dentistry journal · 2026Article
- Effectiveness of Continuous and Sequential Chelation and Different Agitation Techniques on Smear Layer Removal and Microhardness of Root Canal Dentin (An In Vitro Study).Dentistry journal · 2025Article
- Multisonic Ultracleaning and Laser-Activated Irrigation Effect Compared to Passive Ultrasonic Activation for Debridement in Minimally Invasive Instrumentation of Necrotic Oval Root Canals: An Ex Vivo Histological Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To compare the effect of syringe irrigation technique, passive ultrasonic activation technique, EDDY activation technique and Er,Cr,YSGG laser activation technique on smear layer removal in root canals Methods: Forty mandibular first premolars with single canal were collected from patients in Qingdao Stomatological Hospital affiliated to Qingdao University. After root canal preparation with ProTaper Universal to F3, they were randomly divided into four groups (n = 10) according to different activation irrigations for the final washing: syringe irrigation (SI), passive ultrasonic activation (PU), EDDY activation (EDDY) and Er,Cr,YSGG laser activation (YSGG). Finally, all the crowns of them were cut off and the root length was trimmed to 15 mm. The roots were split longitudinally and observed with scanning electron microscope (SEM) for assessment of smear layer removal in different parts of the root canal. Results: All groups showed similar effects for cleaning the root canals in the coronal thirds (P > 0.05). For cleaning the root canals in the middle thirds, PU group, EDDY group and YSGG group showed similar effects, (P> 0.05). They were more effective than SI group (P < 0.05). For cleaning the root canals in the apical thirds, PU group and EDDY group showed similar effects (P> 0.05). They were more effective than SI group (P < 0.05). YSGG group was more effective than other groups (P < 0.05). Conclusion: Er,Cr,YSGG laser activation technique can remove smear layer of root canals effectively. The cleaning effect of the passive ultrasonic activation technique, EDDY activation technique is better than that of syringe irrigation technique.
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.