2022
DOI: 10.1007/s00784-022-04424-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Improving the microbial sampling and analysis of secondary infected root canals by passive ultrasonic irrigation

Abstract: Objective The persistence of pathogenic microorganisms in root canals is the most common reason for the failure of root canal treatment and the necessity of a root filling treatment, which results in an uncertain prognosis due to technical complexity and the variety of highly adaptable microorganisms. This study evaluated the effect of passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI) on the outcome of the microbial analysis of root canal-treated teeth with persistent or recurrent apical inflamma… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

1
1
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

1
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
1
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In the analysis of debris removal from each cavity individually, it could be observed that all PUI groups were better than CI and negative control groups in cavities 1, 2, and 3. This finding shows the importance of the physical action of irrigation for improving the apical third cleaning [27,28]. The greater effectiveness of PUI in cleaning the root canal apical third was observed in some studies [5,6].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 52%
“…In the analysis of debris removal from each cavity individually, it could be observed that all PUI groups were better than CI and negative control groups in cavities 1, 2, and 3. This finding shows the importance of the physical action of irrigation for improving the apical third cleaning [27,28]. The greater effectiveness of PUI in cleaning the root canal apical third was observed in some studies [5,6].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 52%
“…One disadvantage of quantification via CFU is that not all bacteria can be cultured [ 55 ], which could further contribute to the discrepancy in results compared to PCR analysis. However, quantifying viable bacteria using CFU made sense in our research project because it is a standard follow-up analysis in dental research to detect initially adherent bacteria [ 25 , 56 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%