ArticleClinical oral investigations2025
Validation of laboratory models used to simulate heat exchange between the root canal and periodontium by comparison to clinical data.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesto record the temperature in the root canal of human teeth ex vivo during and after syringe delivery of an irrigant at 60 °C or at room temperature while simulating heat exchange with the periodontium by five different models and to compare it to previously published clinical data. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe root canals of four extracted human teeth were prepared to size 40/0.04 taper. Thermocouples were inserted into the roots to monitor the intracanal temperature. The roots were surrounded by air at room temperature (model A), water at 35 °C (model W), gelatinized Hank's Balanced Salt Solution at 37 °C (model G), pre-soaked liquid-absorbing floral foam at room temperature (model F), or alginate at 37 °C (model AL). The root canals were irrigated with distilled water at 60 °C or at room temperature. Agreement of the intracanal temperature with previously published clinical data was assessed using non-parametric Bland-Altman plots and the Concordance Correlation Coefficient (CCC).
resultsThe intracanal temperature agreed closely with the clinical data during the delivery of the irrigant. Afterwards, models W, AL, and G showed moderate to substantial agreement with the in vivo data (CCC = 0.90-0.99) in most cases. Conversely, models A and F showed no to poor agreement (CCC=-0.01-0.64).
conclusionsThe use of models A and F is not warranted. The optimum choice among the other three models depends on the requirements of each experiment. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Laboratory studies should employ models that mimic the in vivo conditions as closely as possible.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41139728What 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.