ArticleBMC oral health2025
Effect of Chitosan and bioactive glass nanomaterials as intracanal medicaments on TGF-β1 release from intraradicular dentin.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThis study aimed to assess the influence of Bioactive glass nanoparticle (BAG-np) and Chitosan nanoparticle (CSNP) as intracanal medications compared with triple antibiotic paste (TAP) on the release of TGF-β1 from radicular dentin via enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).
methodsForty dentin discs (1-mm thick) were horizontally cut from roots of 40 teeth.The samples were submerged in 20 ml of 1.5% NaOCL, followed by submersion in 20 ml 17% of EDTA, after which they were distributed equally into 2 experimental groups (I, II) and 2 control groups (III, IV) (10 samples each). Group I: (BAG-np), group II: (CSNP), group III: (TAP) (positive control) and group IV: nonmedicated (negative control). After 3 weeks, the medications were removed via Phosphate buffer saline (PBS), and the samples were subsequently submerged in PBS for 24 h at 37 °C. The medium from the samples was collected and used to measure the TGF-β1 concentration via ELISA.
resultsThere was a statistically significant difference between the BAG-np, CSNP, and nonmedicated groups compared to the TAP group (P-value < 0.05). The highest value of released (TGF-β1) was recorded in the CSNP group, followed by the BAG-np group, then the nonmedicated group, whereas the lowest value was recorded in the TAP group.
conclusionBAG-np and CSNP induce the release of TGF-β1after irrigation with 1.5% NaOCl and 17%EDTA, significantly greater than TAP. Accordingly, BAG-np and CSNP may be used as alternatives to TAP in regenerative endodontic procedures.
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.