ArticleScientific reports2026
Comparative evaluation of irrigation techniques on dentin nanohardness, flexural strength, and chemical composition: an in vitro study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Effect of Various Root Canal Irrigation Techniques on Root Dentin Mechanical Properties: An In Vitro Study.International journal of dentistry · 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
This investigation sought to evaluate the comparative influence of different irrigation activation protocols-ultrasonic, sonic, XP-Endo Finisher, and manual dynamic activation (MDA)-on the nanohardness, elastic modulus, flexural strength, and elemental composition of root dentin. Fifty intact single-rooted human mandibular premolars were decoronated 15 mm from the apex and instrumented using the ProTaper Next rotary file system (Dentsply Sirona, USA) under standardized irrigation protocols. Specimens were randomized into five groups (n = 10/group): ultrasonic activation, sonic activation, MDA, XP-Endo Finisher, and a non-activated control. Nanohardness and elastic modulus were measured, while flexural strength was evaluated using a three-point bending test. Elemental composition analysis was conducted with energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscop. Statistical comparisons were performed using one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey's HSD post hoc tests in SPSS v26 (IBM, USA), with significance set at p < 0.05. Statistical comparisons revealed statistically insignificant differences in nanohardness / GPa (F = 1.207, p = 0.321) and flexural strength / GPa (F = 0.808, p = 0.527) across groups. However, elastic modulus / MPa exhibited intergroup variation (p < 0.05), with post hoc Tukey's tests indicating higher values in the sonic activation group compared to ultrasonic activation and XP-Endo Finisher groups. EDS analysis showed no significant differences in oxygen, calcium, or phosphorus content (p > 0.05). Irrigation activation protocols had no significant effect on root dentin nanohardness, flexural strength, or elemental composition; however, sonic activation demonstrated a significantly higher elastic modulus. These findings highlight the mechanical stability of dentin across various activation methods.
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.