ReviewScientifica2025
Bacterial Leakage Testing in Dentistry: A Comprehensive Review on Methods, Models, and Clinical Relevance.
Review in Scientifica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mesoporous Bioactive Glass Nanoparticle-Reinforced Calcium Silicate Sealer for Reduced Microleakage and Enhanced Antibacterial Performance.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Article
- A Novel Laboratorial Approach to Evaluate Bacterial Microleakage of Endodontic Sealers.Current protocols · 2026Article
- Assessment of Sealing Ability and Degradation Resistance of a Hydrogel-Based Root Canal Filling Material Using a Bacterial Leakage Model and SEM Analysis.BioMed research international · 2026Article
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
Background: The marginal gap increases the rate of bacterial leakage and treatment failure; the measurement of the marginal gap is questionable. The literature revealed that when bacteria get trapped within the smear layer, they can multiply and re-contaminate the root canal system, leading to treatment failure. Methodology: A literature search was carried out in multiple databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and ScienceDirect, with the help of MeSH terms such as Bacterial infection, Bacterial leakage, Dental leakage, Dental material, Root canal preparation, Root canal obturation, and Tooth penetration. Result: The initial result of the search showed 2252 articles that were relevant enough. However, only 26 articles were eligible based on inclusion criteria. Conclusion: The bacterial leakage test can evaluate one of the most essential properties of dental material: sealing ability. The sealing ability of a dental material can prevent bacterial ingestion and reduce the treatment failure rate. This study discussed all the steps of the bacterial leakage test in detail. This study can help the researcher plan and run a bacterial leakage study successfully, and the results can help clinicians choose the best sealing material for the clinical scenario.
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.