ArticleInternational endodontic journal2025
Development of a novel laboratory approach for evaluating the adhesion strength of biofilms to human dentine.
Article in International endodontic journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Development of a novel laboratory approach for evaluating the adhesion strength of biofilms to human dentine.International endodontic journal · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionBiofilms may show varying adherence strengths to dentine. This study quantified the shear force required for the detachment of multispecies biofilm from the dentine using fluid dynamic gauging (FDG) and computation fluid dynamics (CFD). To date this force has not been quantified.
methodsMultispecies biofilms were grown over 3, 7 and 14 days on 2 mm thick dentine sections of human molars (n = 8 per group). The FDG technique with different suction flow rates (100%, 80% and 40%) was used to assess biofilm removal. At maximum suction (100%), the flow rate was 500 mL/min. Digital images of each stained dentine sample were captured (10× magnification) before and after subjecting the samples to the various suction flow rates. The change in colour saturation versus control (△E) value was determined to assess removal of biofilm using digital softwares (Image J© and Colormine©). The imposed shear forces were then estimated using CFD and correlated with the △E values.
resultsFDG and CFD analysis showed that complete removal of biofilm by using water as the gauging liquid was not possible across any of the experimental groups. Three-day biofilms required significantly lower shear forces for removal than 7-day or 14-day biofilms. The maximum shear forces were seen in the 14-day biofilm group at all flow rates tested. When assessing for residual biofilm on the dentine, the △E value showed residual biofilms of approximately 40% at all time periods at a 100% flowrate. Complete removal of multispecies biofilm was not possible in any experimental group.
conclusionsThis study for the first-time records forces needed to remove polymicrobial biofilms form the surface of a dentine sample. Within the limits of this study, mature biofilms require greater shear forces for removal. This is important when planning protocols for biofilm removal.
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.