Effect of Combined Use of Photon-Initiated Photoacoustic Streaming and Chitosan on Smear Layer Removal

Sari, Fatih; Tosun, Samet; Aksoy, Fatih; Ucar, Zubeyde Gundogar

doi:10.5152/eurjther.2018.445

Cited by 1 publication

(9 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We found 4 (high risk) for one study (Sari et al, 2018) of the risk of bias, 5 (medium risk) for five studies (Darrag, 2014;Kamble et al, 2017;Kaur et al, 2020;Madhusudhana et al, 2015;Penumaka et al, 2019) of the risk of bias, and 6 (medium risk) for only one study ( _ Ilhan, 2019) of the risk of bias in Table 2.…”

Section: Risk Of Bias In Studiesmentioning

confidence: 76%

“…The evaluation of the smear layer was carried out on apical segments in two studies (Kamble et al, 2017; Penumaka et al, 2019). The others in this evaluation were performed on apical, middle, and coronal segments (Darrag, 2014; İlhan, 2019; Kaur et al, 2020; Madhusudhana et al, 2015; Sari et al, 2018) in Table 1.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…that affect the removal of the smear layer of the teeth were distributed among the groups. There was no control group in one study (Sari et al, 2018). The sample size was calculated as preoperative in one study (Penumaka et al, 2019).…”

Section: Results Of Individual Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The smear score was evaluated employing Torabinejad's (Kanter et al, 2011) method in two studies (Kaur et al, 2020; Madhusudhana et al, 2015), Kanter's (Kanter et al, 2011) method in two studies (Darrag, 2014; Kamble et al, 2017), and Hulsman's (Hülsmann et al, 1997) method in three studies (İlhan, 2019; Penumaka et al, 2019; Sari et al, 2018). To determine the inter‐ and intra‐observer reliability of the scoring systems, kappa testing is required.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Only one of the included studies (İlhan, 2019) performed the interobserver kappa test. In six included studies (Darrag, 2014; Kamble et al, 2017; Kaur et al, 2020; Madhusudhana et al, 2015; Penumaka et al, 2019; Sari et al, 2018), this could potentially cause introduce bias.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

The comparative of chitosan and chitosan nanoparticle versus ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid on the smear layer removal: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of in vitro study

İlhan,

Cakici,

Cakici

2023

Microscopy Res & Technique

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this systematic review of meta‐analysis was to compare the effectiveness of removing the smearing layer using EDTA versus Chitosan (Ch) and Chitosan nanoparticles (Ch‐NPs). A search was performed in four electronic databases (Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane). The included studies were assessed by two reviewers using Joanna Briggs Institute's critical appraisal checklist for the quasi‐experimental studies. Outcomes obtained by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and conventional methods were presented as standardized mean differences alongside 95% confidence intervals. Seven investigations employed 212 single‐root teeth. In the apical section (p = .317, 95% CI = −0.820 to 0.266, Tau2 = 0.387), middle segment (p = .914, 95% CI = −1.019 to 0.912, Tau2 = 1.027), and coronal segment (p = .277, 95% CI = −1.008 to 0.289, Tau2 = 0.378). This meta‐analysis found no difference between Ch, Ch‐NPs, and EDTA in removing the smear layer in the three segments. This systematic review is designed to show evidence related to the PICO question, in which our outcome is smear layer removal and not the clinical success of such a treatment.Research Highlights The study aimed to compare the effectiveness of chitosan and chitosan nanoparticles with ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) in removing the smear layer, a layer of debris and organic material on the tooth surface, through a systematic review and meta‐analysis. The removal of the smear layer is crucial for successful dental treatments, as it enhances the adhesion of restorative materials and improves the penetration of antimicrobial agents into dentinal tubules. The researchers conducted a systematic review and meta‐analysis, searching various databases of electron microscopy results for relevant in vitro studies comparing the effects of chitosan or chitosan nanoparticles with EDTA on smear layer removal. The results encourage further exploration of chitosan and chitosan nanoparticles for clinical use in dentistry, while considering their specific applications and long‐term effects.

show abstract