ArticleMicroscopy research and technique2025
The Effect of Various Irrigants on Mixed Biofilms in Dentinal Tubules: A Confocal Laser Scanning Microscopy Study.
Article in Microscopy research and technique, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Study of the Sealing and Antibacterial Properties of Bioceramic Root Canal Sealers Modified With Quaternary Ammonium Salt].Sichuan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Sichuan University. Medical science edition · 2026Article
- The Effect of Various Irrigants on Mixed Biofilms in Dentinal Tubules: A Confocal Laser Scanning Microscopy Study.Microscopy research and technique · 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
This study evaluated the bacterial disinfection efficacy of three different irrigation solutions and their combined usage in dentin tubules contaminated with mixed biofilms. A total of 60 single-rooted mandibular premolars were prepared with ProTaper Next X4, sterilized, and then inoculated with mixed biofilm for 7 days. After biofilm formation, the teeth were randomly divided into six groups (n = 10) based on the irrigation solution used: Group 1: sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl), Group 2: chlorhexidine gluconate (CHX), Group 3: polyhexamethylene biguanide (PHMB), Group 4: NaOCl + CHX, Group 5: NaOCl + PHMB, Group 6: distilled water (control group). The teeth were sectioned at the coronal, middle, and apical thirds and stained with LIVE/DEAD BackLight and examined under a confocal laser scanning microscope (CLSM) to determine the depth of dead bacterial penetration into the dentinal tubules. Additionally, one tooth from each group was subjected to bacterial viable counting before and after irrigation. The CLSM analysis revealed that the greatest penetration of dead bacteria occurred in the coronal third, followed by the apical and middle third (p < 0.05). Combined solutions demonstrated significantly higher disinfection efficacy compared with PHMB alone (p < 0.001). Viable count analysis revealed that Group 4 and Group 5 exhibited the greatest reduction in bacterial proliferation, respectively. The combined use of solutions was found to be more effective than the sole use of solutions. Therefore, it is recommended to combine irrigation solutions during final irrigation in clinical settings.
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.