Ten years of minimally invasive access cavities in Endodontics: a bibliometric analysis of the 25 most-cited studies

Silva, Emmanuel João Nogueira Leal; Pinto, Karem Paula; Ajuz, Natasha C.; Sassone, Luciana Moura

doi:10.5395/rde.2021.46.e42

Cited by 11 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is the core principle. Endodontics pioneers Clark and Khademi have been credited with the development of minimally invasive access cavities [ 19 ]. The occlusal and cervical portions of the tooth are less stressed according to the Consortium for Educational Communication (CEC) design, which preserves more of the coronal tooth structure (Yuan et al, 2016).…”

Section: Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Minimal Invasive Endodontics: A Comprehensive Narrative Review

Marvaniya¹,

Agarwal²,

Mehta³

et al. 2022

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is the aim of any surgical procedure to restore the tooth to its normal form and function, as well as to restore the tooth's appearance when it is appropriate to do so. One of the primary purposes of endodontic therapy is to clear out the root canal system of germs, pulpal remains, and other foreign matter. A tooth's biomechanical properties have to be compromised in order to achieve this goal; hence the tooth has a poor prognosis for restorative success. The remaining dental structure and restorations have a significant impact on the long-term viability of an endodontically treated tooth. Minimally invasive endodontics (MIE) is an endodontic technique that aims to maintain as much of the healthy coronal, cervical, and radicular tooth structure as possible. Access opening, root canal cleaning and shaping, and surgical endodontics are all possible applications for MIE in endodontic treatment. The objective of new-age endodontics is minimum intervention, and this review article examines a variety of methods that may be combined at each level of endodontics to reach this goal. A favorable outcome with minimally invasive treatment may be achieved while preserving the tooth's natural structure with careful case selection.

show abstract

Section: Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Minimal Invasive Endodontics: A Comprehensive Narrative Review

Marvaniya¹,

Agarwal²,

Mehta³

et al. 2022

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(Fig. 1.A) Even 10 years after the rst proposed application and the religious support from proponents and in uencers in the eld of endodontology, MIE is still controversial because many critical aspects still remain to be studied, and no clear evidence shows that MIE is better than traditional endodontics in fracture resistance [3][4][5]. Some important factors may affect the fracture strength of ETT, such as structural integrity [6], morphology [7], sizes of root canal preparations [8] and prosthetic reasons [9].…”

Section: Access Cavity Designsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several designs of MIE cavities have been proposed, including contracted endodontic cavities (CECs) [5], which are also known as "ninja" or ultraconservative endodontic cavities [11], truss endodontic cavities (TRECs) [12], and computer-aided design guided endodontic cavities (GECs) [13].…”

Section: Access Cavity Designsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effects of Different Endodontic Cavities on the Fracture Resistance of Endodontically Treated Mandibular First Molars- A Three-dimensional Finite Element Analysis

Wang

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to predict the fracture resistance of endodontically treated mandibular first molars (MFMs) with diverse minimally invasive endodontic access cavities using finite element models.Materials and Methods: Based on microcomputed tomographic data of an MFM, five three-dimensional finite element models representing a natural tooth (NT) and 4 endodontically treated MFMs were generated using finite element analysis software (HyperWork 14.0, Altair, USA). Treated MFM models were with a traditional endodontic cavity (TEC) and minimal invasive endodontic (MIE) cavities, including a computer-aided designed guided endodontic cavity (GEC), contracted endodontic cavity (CEC) and truss endodontic cavity (TREC). Three loading conditions were applied, simulating a maximum bite force of 600 N vertically and a normal masticatory force of 225 N vertically and laterally. The distributions of von Mises (VM) stress and peak VM stress were calculated.Results: The peak VM stresses of the NT model were the lowest under normal masticatory forces. In endodontically treated models, the distribution of VM stress in GEC model under all loads was the most similar to NT model. The peak VM stresses of the GEC and CEC models under different forces were lower than those of TREC and TEC models. The peak VM stresses of the GEC were lower than those of the CEC under normal masticatory loads but higher under maximum bite load. Under two vertical loads, the peak VM stresses of the TREC model were the highest, while under the lateral load, the peak VM stress of the TEC model was the highest. However, the VM stress in most part of the TEC model was higher than that in TREC model under all loads. Conclusions: Compared with TEC, GEC and CEC could better improve the fracture resistance of teeth. TREC may have a limited effect on fracture resistance enhancement when compared to GEC and CEC.Clinical Relevance: Our data demonstrated that compared with TEC and TREC, GEC and CEC access could better improve the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth, which may be an alternative balancing biomechanical properties and clinical convenience.

show abstract

“…Even 10 years after the first proposed application and the religious support from proponents and influencers in the field of endodontology, MIE is still controversial because many critical aspects still remain to be studied, and no clear evidence shows that MIE is better than traditional endodontics in fracture resistance [ 3 – 5 ]. Some important factors may affect the fracture strength of ETT, such as structural integrity [ 6 ], morphology [ 7 ], sizes of root canal preparations [ 8 ] and prosthetic reasons [ 9 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…MIE cavities are applied to conserve structural integrity by using different cavity designs in building pathways to each root canal during endodontic treatment. Several designs of MIE cavities have been proposed, including contracted endodontic cavities (CECs)[ 5 ], which are also known as “ninja” or ultraconservative endodontic cavities [ 11 ], truss endodontic cavities (TRECs) [ 12 ], and computer-aided design guided endodontic cavities (GECs) [ 13 ] .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of access cavities on the biomechanics of mandibular molars: a finite element analysis

Wang

et al. 2023

BMC Oral Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction This study aimed to predict the fracture resistance of a mandibular first molar (MFM) with diverse endodontic cavities using finite element analysis (FEA). Methods Five experimental finite element models representing a natural tooth (NT) and 4 endodontically treated MFMs were generated. Treated MFM models were with a traditional endodontic cavity (TEC) and minimally invasive endodontic (MIE) cavities, including guided endodontic cavity (GEC), contracted endodontic cavity (CEC) and truss endodontic cavity (TREC). Three loads were applied, simulating a maximum bite force of 600 N (N) vertically and a normal masticatory force of 225 N vertically and laterally. The distributions of von Mises (VM) stress and maximum VM stress were calculated. Results The maximum VM stresses of the NT model were the lowest under normal masticatory forces. In endodontically treated models, the distribution of VM stress in GEC model was the most similar to NT model. The maximum VM stresses of the GEC and CEC models under different forces were lower than those of TREC and TEC models. Under vertical loads, the maximum VM stresses of the TREC model were the highest, while under the lateral load, the maximum VM stress of the TEC model was the highest. Conclusion The stress distribution of tooth with GEC was most like NT. Compared with TECs, GECs and CECs may better maintain fracture resistance, TRECs, however, may have a limited effect on maintenance of the tooth resistance.

show abstract

Ten years of minimally invasive access cavities in Endodontics: a bibliometric analysis of the 25 most-cited studies

Cited by 11 publications

References 60 publications

Minimal Invasive Endodontics: A Comprehensive Narrative Review

Minimal Invasive Endodontics: A Comprehensive Narrative Review

The Effects of Different Endodontic Cavities on the Fracture Resistance of Endodontically Treated Mandibular First Molars- A Three-dimensional Finite Element Analysis

Effect of access cavities on the biomechanics of mandibular molars: a finite element analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About