Trial reportDental press journal of orthodontics2026
Evaluation and comparison of antimicrobial property of chitosan nanoparticles on nickel-titanium archwires: an in vivo study.
Trial report in Dental press journal of orthodontics, 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.
- Chitosan-Based Coatings for Orthodontic Appliances: Antimicrobial Properties, Potential Ion-Release Mitigation, and Clinical-Translation Perspectives.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionFixed orthodontic appliances can serve as a breeding ground for bacterial accumulation and colonization, which are responsible for the development of white spot lesions (WSLs).
objectiveThis study evaluated and compared the antibacterial activity of chitosan nanoparticle-coated and uncoated nickel-titanium (NiTi) orthodontic archwires against Streptococcus mutans (S. mutans) and Lactobacillus acidophilus (L. acidophilus). MATERIAL AND
methodsThirty patients received 0.016-in NiTi archwires, using a split-mouth design. Sixty archwires were randomized into two groups: Group A, nanochitosan-coated (n = 30, experimental), and Group B, uncoated (n = 30, control). Allocation was determined using sequentially numbered, opaque, sealed envelopes prepared by an independent researcher, with assignments concealed until allocation. The ionic gelation technique was used for coating. After six weeks in the oral cavity, archwires were retrieved, and bacterial presence was evaluated as Colony Forming Units (CFUs), through culture formation.
resultsA statistically significant difference was observed in the mean CFU counts of S. mutans and L. acidophilus between the experimental and control groups (p < 0.001). The mean CFU values for S. mutans were 0.12 × 106 CFU/ml (SD ± 0.38; experimental) and 1.82 × 106 CFU/ml (SD ± 0.69; control). For L. acidophilus, mean CFUs were 0.036 × 106 CFU/ml (SD ± 0.06; experimental) and 1.96 × 106 CFU/ml (SD ± 0.65; control).
conclusionOrthodontic archwires coated with nanochitosan demonstrated significantly greater antimicrobial activity against S. mutans and L. acidophilus compared with uncoated archwires.
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.