ArticleBMC oral health2026
The conundrum of current endodontic disinfection strategies in microbial load reduction: a scoping review.
Article in BMC oral health, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEffective disinfection is a diligent step in the treatment of endodontic infections to reduce the microbial load below a critical level that promotes healing of apical periodontitis (AP). Despite its clinical importance, there is no consensus on the most effective disinfection strategy to achieve this goal. Therefore, this scoping review aimed to comprehensively review the role of current disinfection therapies in microbial reduction during root canal treatment (RCT).
methodsA systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar. Relevant clinical studies were selected based on predefined inclusion criteria. Data extraction focused on microbial load reduction, disinfection protocols, and microbial detection techniques.
resultsOut of 3519 retrieved articles, 148 were eligible and processed for data extraction. All included studies were clinical studies. Most of the studies were primary RCT (82.43%) and secondary RCT (15.54%). While only 3 studies (2.03%) included both primary and secondary RCT. Microbial load reduction was assessed in the majority of the studies, while few others assessed endotoxin reduction. The mean percentage of microbial load reduction was (87.24 ± 21.86). The most frequently used disinfection regimens were irrigation with; (2.5% NaOCl alone, 2.5% NaOCl followed by 17% EDTA, 2%CHX; 16.05%, 11.11%, 10.49% respectively), activation methods including; passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI); 12.35%, photodynamic therapy (PDT); 11.11%, and laser; 11.11%) and intracanal medication (ICM) with Ca (OH)2, Ca (OH)2 + 2%CHX, or 2%CHX; 31.48%, 10.51%, 7.41% respectively. The most prevalent methods of microbial detection were culture-based (64.86%), and molecular-based methods were performed in 58.10% of the studies.
conclusionA combination of advanced irrigation techniques, appropriate ICM, and adjunctive disinfection activation techniques provides the most effective approach for both microbial and endotoxin reduction. However, complete disinfection and its influence on the validity of treatment outcomes remain a dilemma. The healing of apical periodontitis is multifactorial, and future research should focus on personalized treatment protocols based on patient and tooth specific considerations to optimize clinical outcomes.
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.