ArticleJournal of conservative dentistry and endodontics2025
Evaluating the influence of different irrigation needles on the apical cleaning efficacy of endodontic irrigation - An
Article in Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Efficiency of Four Irrigation Needles in Curved Simulated Root Canals.Dentistry journal · 2026Article
- Effect of preendodontic build-up on irrigant penetration in extracted single-rooted premolars: AnJournal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 2026Article
- Cleaning ability of two irrigating solutions in primary root canals.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- Evaluating the interaction of local anesthetic agents with sequential and continuous chelation in root dentin - AnJournal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 2025Article
- Access cavity in endodontics: Balancing precision, preservation, and clinical needs.Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 2025Article
- Influence of irrigation needle type on apical cleaning efficacy in endodontic treatment - AnBioinformation · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Context: Irrigation is an essential part of a successful root canal treatment. Aim: This study evaluates and compares the influence of three different double-sided vented irrigation needle gauges (G) (27G, 30G, and 31G) on the apical cleaning effectiveness of endodontic irrigation using radiovisiography. Settings and Design: A thorough protocol describing the objectives and methodologies of the study was submitted to the Institutional Ethics Committee, Vivekanandha Dental College for Women. Ethical clearance no. VDCW/IEC/340/2023. Subjects and Methods: Forty-five human mandibular premolars were extracted, filled with a radiopaque medium, and subjected to irrigation with three varying sizes of double-sided vented irrigation needles. Preirrigation and postirrigation radiographic images were digitally subtracted to assess the cleaned areas. Statistical Analysis Used: Statistical analysis was carried out with SPSS version 27. For the purpose of intergroup comparisons, one-way analysis of variance was implemented, followed by the execution of the Tukey honestly significant difference post hoc test. Throughout the comparisons, Results: Maximum cleaning was observed in 31G double-sided vented irrigation needles, followed by 30G and 27G double-sided vented irrigation needles. Conclusions: The 31G double-sided vented irrigation needles exhibit a higher level of effectiveness in the cleansing of the apical third of the root canal system in comparison to the other two irrigation needle variants.
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.