ArticleJournal of conservative dentistry and endodontics2026
Evaluation of debris and smear layer removal efficacy of different irrigating solutions using the C-RCC irrigation system: An
Article in Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Conventional use of sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) and ethylenediaminetetraacetate (EDTA) for debris and smear layer removal may weaken dentin and prolong clinical procedures, prompting a search for safer, more efficient, and multifunctional irrigants. Thus, the present study aimed to evaluate debris and smear layer removal efficacy of different irrigating solutions using C-RCC irrigator. Materials and Methods: Eighty extracted single-rooted mandibular premolars were decoronated, instrumented with ProTaper Universal files, and randomly allocated into four groups ( Results: All irrigants except saline showed varying cleaning abilities. NaOCl-EDTA (debris = 1, smear layer = 1.25) and superoxidized water (debris = 1.2, smear layer = 1.45) demonstrated similar efficacy with statistically insignificant difference, although values were slightly higher for NaOCl-EDTA and both were significantly more effective than NaOCl-neem extract and saline. Coronal thirds showed better cleanliness than the middle and apical thirds. Conclusion: NaOCl-EDTA remained the most effective regimen. However, superoxidised water showed promise as a single, efficient irrigant.
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.