ArticleBMC oral health2025
Effect of different cleaning methods on surface contamination of unused endodontic files: a scanning electron microscopy analysis.
Article in BMC oral health, 2025. 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
backgroundThe aim of this study is to analyze the residual organic film and debris on the surface of new endodontic files following different mechanical cleaning protocols.
methodsFifty new nickel-titanium (NiTi) rotary instruments were used. Initial scanning electron microscope (SEM) images were obtained and debris amounts were scored between 0 and 3. Files were then divided into five groups, each subjected to a different cleaning protocol: 1. group: Autoclave sterilization without mechanical cleaning, 2.group: Ultrasonic cleaning, 3.group: Brushing and ultrasonic cleaning, 4.group: Cleaning with 0.2% chlorhexidine-impregnated sponge and ultrasonic cleaning, 5. group: Cleaning with 70% alcohol-impregnated gauze and ultrasonic cleaning. Post-cleaning Scanning Electron Microscope images were taken, and surface debris was re-scored. Data normality was assessed using visual (histogram, Q–Q plot) and statistical (Shapiro–Wilk test) methods. As the distribution was non-normal, non-parametric tests were used: the Fisher-Freeman-Halton test for intergroup comparisons and the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test for within-group comparisons.
resultsAccording to the Fisher-Freeman-Halton test, a statistically significant difference was found between groups in terms of post-cleaning scores (p < 0.001). All groups except Group 1 showed a significant decrease in scores after cleaning. The Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test revealed statistically significant differences between pre- and post-cleaning scores in Groups 2, 3, 4, and 5 (p = 0.008, p = 0.004, p = 0.006, and p = 0.004, respectively). Significant reductions in median contamination scores were observed in these groups. In Group 1, no statistically significant difference was found (p = 0.083). Numerically, the lowest median post-cleaning score (1.0) was seen in Groups 3, 4, and 5. The highest median percentage change was observed in Groups 4 and 5 (67%), followed by Group 3 (58%), and Group 2 (33%). No change was observed in Group 1.
conclusionWithin the limitations of this study, it was shown that autoclave sterilization without mechanical cleaning is not sufficient for effective cleaning. Mechanical cleaning prior to sterilization is necessary for proper decontamination of endodontic files. Sponge and gauze-based methods were found to be the most effective, while brushing also provided a notable improvement in surface cleanliness.
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.