Effectiveness of photon-initiated photoacoustic streaming in root canal models with different diameters or tapers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare the use of photon-initiated photoacoustic streaming (PIPS) and conventional needle irrigation (CNI) in conjunction with different concentrations of sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) to remove Enterococcus faecalis (E. faecalis) suspended bacteria and biofilms from root canal systems with different diameters or tapers. METHODS: Artificial root canal samples (n = 480) were randomly divided into three groups (n = 160/group). The canals were prepared to fit file sizes #10/.02, #25/.02, or #25/.06. The size #10/.02 group was incubated for seven days. The size #25/.02 or #25/.06 group was incubated for 2 days. A stable biological model of E. faecalis infection was established. The root canals were washed with distilled water or with 1%, 2%, or 5.25% NaOCl combined with CNI or PIPS. Bacterial suspensions and biofilms were assessed using an ATP assay kit and fluorescence microscopy. Image-Pro Plus was used to analyse the average fluorescence intensity to determine the most suitable root canal irrigation solution. RESULTS: In the CNI and PIPS groups, the ATP value of the 5.25% NaOCl subgroup was the lowest, followed by that of the 2% and 1% NaOCl subgroups. The ATP value of the distilled water subgroup was the highest (P < 0.05). When the root canal taper was 0.02, the ATP value of the #10/.02 + PIPS group was significantly lower than that of the #25/.02 + CNI group (P < 0.05). The average fluorescence intensity of the #10/.02 + PIPS group was lower than that of the #25/.02 + CNI group (P < 0.05). When the apical diameter was #25, the ATP value of the 0.02 taper in the PIPS group was lower than that of the 0.06 taper in the CNI group (P < 0.05), and the average fluorescence intensity of the 0.02 taper + PIPS group was lower than that of the 0.06 taper + CNI group (P < 0.05). PIPS combined with 2% and 5.25% NaOCl effectively improved the long-term antibacterial effect after irrigation and re-culture for 6 h. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with CNI, PIPS has greater ability to remove bacteria in root canals with a small preparation diameter and a small taper. PIPS with 2% and 5.25% NaOCl exhibited superior antibacterial and bacteriostatic effects.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".