Evaluation of bacterial biofilm, smear layer, and debris removal efficacy of a hydro-dynamic cavitation system with physiological saline using a new ex vivo model: a CLSM and SEM study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction To evaluate the bacterial biofilm, smear layer and debris removal efficacy of a hydro-dynamic cavitation system with physiological saline using a new ex vivo model. Methods Seventy-five dentin discs were prepared from fifty-four extracted teeth. Seventy-five artificial root sockets were prepared. Sixty dentin discs were used to grow 3-week-old bacterial biofilms, while smear layer and debris were produced on fifteen dentin discs. These dentin discs were adhered to the middle third of the artificial root canals. The sixty ex vivo models with biofilm-covered dentin discs were divided into six groups: control, needle with physiological saline, ultrasonic with physiological saline, Odne™ Clean with physiological saline, needle with 3% NaOCl, and ultrasonic with 3% NaOCl. Biofilm removal efficacy was evaluated using confocal laser scanning microscopy. The fifteen ex vivo models with smear layer and debris-covered dentin discs were divided into three groups: control, Odne™ Clean with physiological saline, and 5% NaOCl followed by 17% EDTA. Smear layer and debris removal efficacy was evaluated using scanning electron microscopy. Statistical analysis was performed using one-way analysis of variance for comparisons involving more than two groups. Post-hoc pairwise comparisons were conducted using the Tukey test. Results Odne TM Clean with physiological saline (98%) performed significantly better than needle irrigation (47%) or ultrasonic activation (54%) with physiological saline ( P < 0.05). Odne TM Clean with physiological saline removed biofilms as effectively as needle irrigation (97%) or ultrasonic activation (98%) with 3% NaOCl ( P > 0.05). Additionally, 5% NaOCl followed by 17% EDTA (score: 1.33) removed the smear layer significantly better than Odne TM Clean with physiological saline (score: 4.47) ( P < 0.05). However, Odne TM Clean with physiological saline (score: 1.27) removed debris as effectively as 5% NaOCl followed by 17% EDTA (score: 1.13) ( P > 0.05). Conclusions Odne TM Clean with physiological saline can effectively remove bacterial biofilm and debris from the dentin surface but cannot effectively remove the smear layer. Utilizing Odne TM Clean during the final irrigation may enhance root canal cleaning efficacy.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".