2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2020.06.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Nanobubble-Enhanced Antimicrobial Agents: A Promising Approach for Regenerative Endodontics

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
11
0
4

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
1
11
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…Residual microorganisms in root canal systems may lead to unsuccessful treatment; thus, safer and more efficient disinfection strategies, such as nanobubble-enhanced antimicrobial agents, are needed in patients with severe periapical lesions rather than routine disinfection [149].…”
Section: Challenge #2: Specific Therapeutic Procedures With Different Indicationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Residual microorganisms in root canal systems may lead to unsuccessful treatment; thus, safer and more efficient disinfection strategies, such as nanobubble-enhanced antimicrobial agents, are needed in patients with severe periapical lesions rather than routine disinfection [149].…”
Section: Challenge #2: Specific Therapeutic Procedures With Different Indicationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…SEM and CLSM are frequently used to evaluate dentinal tubule penetration of root canal irrigation solutions, intracanal medicaments and root canal sealers in endodontics [20]. In order to obtain an image in SEM, dentin discs must be dried in the oven and exposed to alcohol and high vacuum applications.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…After the first screening (Step 1), 55 articles were selected and submitted to a full-text review (Step 2). Then, 19 studies were excluded, in which 13 (Arslan et al, 2014;Bosaid et al, 2020;Buldur et al, 2019;Ivica et al, 2020;Kandemir Demirci et al, 2020;Nagata et al, 2014;Nerness et al, 2016;Saghiri et al, 2016;Shawli et al, 2020;Ustun et al, 2018;Widbiller et al, 2018;Yassen et al, 2014Yassen et al, , 2015 were outside of the proposed theme, and 6 had no control group (Ferreira et al, 2020;Galler et al, 2011;Graham et al, 2006;Hristov et al, 2018;Tomson et al, 2007;Trevino et al, 2011; Figure 1). A total of 36 studies were included in the qualitative analysis and are presented in Tables 1, 2 and 3. The assessed Cohen's kappa coefficient for interinvestigator agreement during the studies' selection was 0.843 for PubMed, 0.970 for Scopus, 1.000 for the Cochrane Library and OpenGrey, 0.925 for the Web of Science and 0.876 for the Embase.…”
Section: Study Selectionmentioning
confidence: 99%