↓ Skip to main content

Effect of final irrigation protocols on microhardness reduction and erosion of root canal dentin

Overview of attention for article published in Brazilian Oral Research, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
116 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Effect of final irrigation protocols on microhardness reduction and erosion of root canal dentin
Published in
Brazilian Oral Research, May 2017
DOI 10.1590/1807-3107bor-2017.vol31.0040
Pubmed ID
Authors

Flávia Emi Razera Baldasso, Luana Roleto, Vinicius Duval da Silva, Renata Dornelles Morgental, Patrícia Maria Poli Kopper

Abstract

This study aimed to evaluate the effect of final irrigation protocols on microhardness reduction and erosion of root canal dentin. Sixty root canals from mandibular incisors were instrumented and randomly divided into six groups (n = 10) according to the irrigant used: QMiX, 17% EDTA, 10% citric acid (CA), 1% peracetic acid (PA), 2.5% NaOCl (solution control), and distilled water (negative control). The chelating solutions were used to irrigate the canal followed by 2.5% NaOCl as a final flush. After the irrigation protocols, all specimens were rinsed with 10 mL of distilled water to remove any residue of the chemical solutions. Before and after the final irrigation protocols, dentin microhardness was measured with a Knoop indenter. Three indentations were made at 100 µm and 500 µm from the root canal lumen. Afterwards, the specimens were prepared for scanning electron microscopic analysis and the amount of dentin erosion was examined. Wilcoxon and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to analyze the results with a significance level set at 5%. At 100 µm, all protocols significantly reduced dentin microhardness (p < .05), while at 500 µm, this effect was detected only in the EDTA and QMiX groups (p < .05). CA was the irrigant that caused more extensive erosion in dentinal tubules, followed by PA and EDTA. QMiX opened dentinal tubules, but did not cause dentin erosion. Results suggest that QMiX and 17% EDTA reduced dentin microhardness at a greater depth. Additionally, QMiX did not cause dentin erosion.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 116 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 116 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 17%
Student > Postgraduate 11 9%
Student > Bachelor 7 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 4%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 4%
Other 12 10%
Unknown 56 48%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 50 43%
Unspecified 3 3%
Environmental Science 1 <1%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 <1%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 <1%
Other 3 3%
Unknown 57 49%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 August 2017.
All research outputs
#17,289,387
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Brazilian Oral Research
#195
of 509 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#207,237
of 324,748 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brazilian Oral Research
#5
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 509 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 324,748 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.