Background. Citation analysis has emerged to play a significant role in recognition of the most useful areas of research. Endodontic microbiology has been a topic of interest for endodontists as well as periodontists and oral surgeons. This bibliometric analysis is aimed at identifying and reporting the characteristics of the top 50 cited articles on endodontic microbiology. Methods. The articles were identified through a search on Web of Science (WoS), property of Clarivate Analytics database published on endodontic microbiology. The citation information of the selected articles was recorded. The Journal of Endodontics, International Endodontic Journal, Oral Surgery Oral Medicine Oral Pathology Oral Radiology and Endodontology, Dental Traumatology, and Australian Endodontic Journal were searched in the search title. Descriptive and bivariate analyses were performed using a statistical software package SPSS. Statistical analysis was performed using Shapiro-Wilk, Kruskal-Wallis, Post hoc, Mann-Kendall trend, and Spearman-rank tests. Results. The 50 most cited articles were published from 1965 to 2012 with citation count varying from 1065 to 103 times. The total citation counts of articles recorded were 11,525 (WoS), 12,602 (Elseviers’ Scopus), and 28,871 (Google Scholar). The most prolific years in terms of publications were 2001, 2002, and 2003, with five publications each, followed by 2005 with four. The year with most citations was 1998, with 1,330 citations, followed by 1965 and 2001, with 1,065 and 1,015 citations, respectively. A total of 136 authors contributed to the top 50 most cited articles with 27 corresponding institutions from 12 different countries. The most common methodological design was in vitro study, followed by clinic-laboratory study, literature review, systematic review and meta-analysis, and animal study. Conclusions. The present study provided a detailed list of the top 50 most cited and classic articles on microbiology in endodontics. This will help researchers, students, and clinicians in the field of endodontics as an impressive source of information.

There is a paucity of information concerning vital pulp treatment outcomes in the undergraduate teaching setting. This study aimed to determine which type of deciduous molar, arch location, type of vital pulp therapy, and the number of carious surfaces involved had a better prognosis when carried out by undergraduate dental students. The method used was the review of clinical records of 590 patients with 600 deciduous molars, that visited the outpatient undergraduate dental clinics for vital pulp therapy. Statistical analysis used to determine the associations of tooth type, arch location, treatment type, and the number of carious surfaces involved in successful outcomes was logistic regression analysis with significance set at p < 0.05. According to the regression analysis model results, there was a significant association based on tooth type (p < 0.05) and arch location (p = 0.003). In addition, there was a significant association based on the type of treatment performed (p = 0.036). However, there was no significant association in success rates based on the number of carious surfaces involved (p = 0.873). In conclusion, second deciduous molars and maxillary deciduous molars had a better overall prognosis, and indirect pulp therapy was revealed to be more highly associated with successful treatment outcomes in comparison to ferric sulfate pulpotomy in our setting.

The purpose of this article is to compare and contrast the different types of endodontic access cavity designs based on the current available evidence. Four types of access cavity designs, namely, traditional endodontic access cavity design (TEC), contracted/conservative endodontic access cavity design (CEC), ultra-conservative or ninja endodontic access cavity design (NEC) and truss endodontic access cavity design (TREC) have been suggested, and the latter three are currently in the limelight. Studies in vitro have been performed comparing the TECs, CECs, TRECs and NECs; except for the TECs, the other three types have not undergone clinical trials on patients. The choice of endodontic access cavity design affects fracture strength of the tooth, but remnants of pulpal tissue, due to ineffective instrumentation, can cause root canal treatment failure. CPD/Clinical Relevance: Root canal treatment with new access cavity designs has been proposed. However, there is lack of evidence to support such practices. It is important to consider the potential deleterious effects of such access cavity designs rather than emphasizing the preservation of tooth structure alone.

No abstract