ArticleClinical oral investigations2025
Evaluating the efficacy of non-activated microbubble emulsions in biofilm removal from 3D-printed root canals.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study evaluates the effectiveness of non-activated microbubble emulsions in removing biofilms in simulated minimally shaped root canals. MATERIALS AND
methodsEnterococcus faecalis biofilms were developed over three weeks in various sizes of 3D-printed root canal models. The biofilm removal efficiency of microbubble emulsions (MB) was compared with several irrigants, sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl), distilled water (DW), and hydrogen peroxide (HP), across different root canal dimensions (20.04, 20.06, 40.04, 40.06). Irrigation was performed using 2.5 mL of each solution for one minute. In the MB groups, the canal was filled with a single emulsion drop and left for one minute. We used confocal laser scanning microscopy and crystal violet colorimetric analysis to assess the effectiveness of biofilm eradication. Bonferroni tests and two-way ANOVA were employed to analyze the data.
resultsIn narrow canals, MB emulsions demonstrated biofilm removal efficacy comparable to NaOCl (P > .05). However, NaOCl was the most effective irrigation solution for wider canals (P < .05). Canal size significantly influenced the biofilm removal efficacy in the MB group (P < .05). Overall, both MB emulsions and NaOCl achieved better biofilm removal results than DW and HP (P < .05).
conclusionThe non-activated MBs have shown effective antibiofilm properties in narrow canals, making them suitable for a minimally invasive approach and indicating their potential role in developing improved irrigation protocols. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study highlights the potential of microbubble emulsions as effective irrigants for minimally shaped root canals, supporting minimally invasive endodontic strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40956370What 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.