首页> 外文期刊>BMC Oral Health >Effectiveness of XP-Endo Finisher and passive ultrasonic irrigation on intracanal medicament removal from root canals: a systematic review and meta-analysis
【24h】

Effectiveness of XP-Endo Finisher and passive ultrasonic irrigation on intracanal medicament removal from root canals: a systematic review and meta-analysis

机译:XP-Endo整理器和被动超声灌溉对根部管内药物去除的有效性:系统评价与荟萃分析

获取原文
           

摘要

XP-Endo Finisher (XPF) and passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI) are commonly used in intracanal medicament removal. The effectiveness of these two techniques needs to be compared, and evidence-based research should be conducted. A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar up to December 20th, 2020. The outcomes of the included trials were pooled into the Cochrane Collaboration’s Review Manager 5.3 software. Cochrane’s risk-of-bias tool 2.0 was applied to assess the risk of bias. Nine articles were included in this systematic review and processed for data extraction, and eight studies were identified for meta-analysis. In general, the use of PUI showed better medicament removal effectiveness than XPF (odds ratio [OR]: 3.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.96–4.86; P??0.001). PUI was also significantly more efficient than XPF in the apical third (OR: 3.42; 95% CI, 1.32–8.84; P?=?0.01). For trials using sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) alone, PUI was also significantly more effective than XPF on intracanal medicaments removal (OR: 5.23; 95% CI, 2.79–9.82; P??0.001). However, there was no significant difference between PUI and XPF when NaOCl and ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) were used in combination (OR: 1.51; 95% CI, 0.74–3.09; P?=?0.26). In addition, for studies whose intracanal medicament periods were two weeks, the effectiveness of PUI was statistically better than the XPF (OR: 7.73; 95% CI, 3.71–16.07; P??0.001). Nevertheless, for trials whose intracanal medicament time was one week or over two weeks, no differences between the XPF and PUI were found (OR: 1.54; 95% CI, 0.74–3.22; P?=?0.25) (OR: 1.42; 95% CI, 0.44–4.61; P?=?0.56). The meta-analysis is the first study to quantitatively compare the effectiveness of XPF and PUI techniques on intracanal medicaments removal. With rigorous eligibility criteria, the study only included high-quality randomised controlled trials. The study indicated that PUI might be superior over XPF techniques for removing intracanal medicaments from artificial standardized grooves and cavities in the root canal system. The anatomical areas, irrigation protocol, and intracanal medicaments time may influence the cleaning efficacy.
机译:XP-Endo Finerisher(XPF)和被动超声灌溉(PUI)通常用于插管药物去除。需要比较这两种技术的有效性,并且应进行基于证据的研究。综合文学搜索是在2020年12月20日的PubMed,Embase,Cochrane图书馆和Google Scholar和Google Scholar的PubMed搜索中进行的。汇集了Cochrane Collaboration的审查经理5.3软件的结果的结果。 Cochrane的偏见风险2.0被应用于评估偏置的风险。在该系统审查中包含九种文章并处理数据提取,并确定八项研究进行了荟萃分析。通常,使用PUI的使用表明,比XPF(差距[或]:3.09; 95%置信区间[CI],1.96-4.86;p≤x,0.001),使用比XPF更好的药物去除效果PUI在顶端第三(或:3.42; 95%CI,1.32-8.84; P?= 0.01)中也比XPF更有效地比XPF更有效。仅使用次氯酸钠(NaoCl)的试验,PUI在颅内药物去除(或:5.23; 95%CI,2.79-9.82;P≥1.001)中也显着更有效。然而,当NaOCl和乙二胺四乙酸(EDTA)组合使用PUI和XPF(或:1.51; 95%CI,0.74-3.09; p?= 0.26)时,PUI和XPF之间没有显着差异。此外,对于喉部药物时期为2周的研究,PUI的有效性在统计学上比XPF更好(或:7.73; 95%CI,3.71-16.07;P≤≤0.001)。尽管如此,对于喉部药物时间为一周或超过两周的试验,发现XPF和PUI之间没有差异(或:1.54; 95%CI,0.74-3.22; P?= 0.25)(或:1.42; 95 %CI,0.44-4.61; p?= 0.56)。 Meta分析是第一研究,可以定量比较XPF和PUI技术对颅内药物去除的有效性。具有严谨的资格标准,该研究仅包括高质量随机对照试验。该研究表明,PUI可能优于XPF技术,用于从根管系统中从人工标准化槽和空腔中移除颈内用品。解剖区域,灌溉方案和胎儿药物时间可能影响清洁功效。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号