ArticleCureus2024
Assessing the Antifungal Effects of Posaconazole and Voriconazole on Soft Liners.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Introduction The cushion effect of soft liners serves to distribute the mastication forces and stresses more evenly, along with absorbing energy. Instead, soft liners can act as a nidus for microbial growth, especially Candida species. An accumulation of these fungi is a problem encountered during the clinical use of them, especially in immunocompromised individuals. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the antifungal activity of soft liners when combined with posaconazole and voriconazole. Methods For this study, one soft liner and two antifungal drugs were used. Before testing, drugs were incorporated in a soft liner, and discs were made that were allowed to be immersed in distilled water. Three groups of five samples each were used to categorize the specimens: groups I, II, and III were GC soft liner, GC soft liner + posaconazole, and GC soft liner + voriconazole, respectively. These samples were assessed for antifungal activity on the 1st, 10th, and 20th day. For antifungal activity, the zone of growth inhibition was measured. Results A statistically significant difference in zone of growth inhibition across three groups was observed. Group II had the highest zone of inhibition, followed by group III and group I, which had the least. In intragroup comparisons over different time intervals, statistically significant variations were observed; day 20 had the highest zone of inhibition, followed by day 10 and day 1. Conclusion Significant changes were seen in the antifungal properties of posaconazole and voriconazole with the soft liner. Posaconazole in soft liners showed a significantly higher zone of growth inhibition than the other two groups.
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.