Synergistic Effect of Mircobubble Emulsion and Sonic or Ultrasonic Agitation on Endodontic Biofilm in Vitro
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the effects of a microbubble emulsion (ME) combined with sonic or ultrasonic agitation, on irrigation dynamics and reduction of biofilm bacteria. High-speed imaging was used to characterize the bubble dynamics generated in ME by sonic or ultrasonic agitation within polymer teeth. 5.25% NaOCl or ME was sonically or ultrasonically agitated in canals of extracted teeth with 7-day-old Enterococcus faecalis biofilms. Dentinal shavings were sampled and colony-forming units (CFU) enumerated. Mean log CFU/ml values were analyzed with ANOVA and post-hoc tests. Strongly oscillating and vaporizing bubbles were generated within ME during ultrasonic, but not sonic agitation. Post-treatment biofilm CFU were significantly lower in the ultrasonic agitation (P=0.000) of ME group than in the ultrasonic (P=0.009) and sonic agitation (P=0.006) of NaOCl groups. The synergistic effect of ME combined with ultrasonic agitation enhanced bubble dynamics and reduced E. faecalis biofilm bacteria beyond the level achieved by agitation of NaOCl.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".