A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Update on chelating agents in endodontic treatment: A systematic review. | LitMetric

Background: The aim of this review was to assess the evidence regarding the most commonly used chelating agents in terms of efficacy, erosive potential, cytotoxicity, interaction, antimicrobial effect, impact on sealers adhesion, and release of growth factors.

Material And Methods: MEDLINE (PubMed) database, Cochrane Library and Scopus were searched up to January 14, 2023, including studies with one or more of the following chelating agents: 17% EDTA, 9% and 18% HEDP, 10% and 20% citric acid, 2%-2.25% peracetic acid and 7% maleic acid. In addition, the reference lists of all selected articles were also checked to identify additional relevant studies. Articles published in English and available in full-text were selected. The quality of studies was assessed using the modified CONSORT checklist guide and the Cochrane Collaboration tool.

Results: The electronic search yielded 538 citations, 56 of which were included. The articles included had moderate and low evidence values. Among 56 articles included, 55 were in vitro studies and one was a randomized clinical trial. Among the in vitro studies, 15 evaluated efficacy and dentin erosion, 12 evaluated interaction with other endodontic irrigants, 9 tested antimicrobial effect, 4 evaluated cytotoxicity in hamster and rat lung cells, 9 evaluated intervention in adhesion of filling materials and 8 focused on release of growth factors and on behavior of stem cells in regenerative endodontic. The RCT tested antimicrobial effect.

Conclusions: 17% EDTA is the most effective in smear layer removal and in releasing growth factors on regenerative endodontics. However, the current incorporation of 9% and 18% etidronic acid has shown optimal results due to its compatibility with sodium hypochlorite and its capability on avoiding smear layer formation through a continuous chelation action. Despite these preliminary findings, methodological standardization between studies is required and in vivo studies are necessary to confirm in vitro studies. Chelating Agents, Smear Layer, Systematic Review, Endodontics, Root Canal Irrigants.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11078497PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/jced.60989DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

chelating agents
16
vitro studies
12
smear layer
12
systematic review
8
release growth
8
studies
8
studies chelating
8
17% edta
8
articles included
8
tested antimicrobial
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!