Tooth discolouration and internal bleaching after the use of triple antibiotic paste
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To assess the discolouration of teeth with closed and open apices after placement of triple antibiotic paste (TAP, ciprofloxacin, metronidazole and minocycline) in the pulp chamber and whether discolouration could be reversed by internal bleaching procedures. METHODOLOGY: Twenty extracted human mandibular premolars were divided into 2 groups (n = 10): teeth with closed apices (CA) and teeth with open apices (OA). After conventional access, the TAP was sealed in the pulp chamber for 3 weeks. The paste was removed by a rinse with sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) and a mixture of sodium perborate and distilled water was sealed in the pulp chamber for 1, 2 and 3 weeks. The shade was measured by a spectrophotometer at six time periods: baseline (T0), after 3 weeks of placement of TAP (T1), after removal of TAP with a NaOCl rinse (T2) and after 1 (T3), 2 (T4) and 3 (T5) weeks of internal bleaching with sodium perborate paste. Data were collected based on the CIELAB-CIE1976 (L*a*b*) system and analysed using t-tests and anova. RESULTS: A significant decrease in the mean values of L* (lightness) was observed after treatment with TAP (T1, P < 0.05). Considerable increases in these values after bleaching with sodium perborate (T3 < T4 < T5) were found in both groups. The only significant difference in the intergroup analysis was between T1 and T2, in which ΔE values in the OA group were higher (P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: TAP discoloured the tooth structure, but discolouration could be reversed with sodium perborate paste. In general, teeth with closed and open apices had the same rates of discolouration and bleaching.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".