天然根管溶液的抗菌功效:一项带有网络荟萃分析的系统综述。

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Brazilian oral research Pub Date : 2024-12-20 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1590/1807-3107bor-2024.vol38.0093
Danilo Cassiano Ferraz, Anahi de Paula Melo, Felipe de Souza Matos, Luiz Renato Paranhos, Camilla Christian Gomes Moura, Cauane Blumenberg, Juliane Maria Guerreiro-Tanomaru, Mário Tanomaru-Filho
{"title":"天然根管溶液的抗菌功效:一项带有网络荟萃分析的系统综述。","authors":"Danilo Cassiano Ferraz, Anahi de Paula Melo, Felipe de Souza Matos, Luiz Renato Paranhos, Camilla Christian Gomes Moura, Cauane Blumenberg, Juliane Maria Guerreiro-Tanomaru, Mário Tanomaru-Filho","doi":"10.1590/1807-3107bor-2024.vol38.0093","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This systematic review aims to provide preclinical evidence of the antimicrobial efficacy of natural endodontic solutions (NES) compared to sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) and chlorhexidine (CHX) against Enterococcus faecalis. The study followed the PRISMA guidelines and had a registered protocol (PROSPERO - CRD42021224022). The inclusion criteria comprised ex vivo studies simulating root canal irrigation to assess the standardized mean difference of colony-forming units (CFUs). Records were systematically identified in PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, SciELO, Web of Science, LILACS, DANS Easy, and BDTD databases in January 2024. The RoBDEMAT tool helped determine the risk of bias. As for the network meta-analysis, CFU data were collected pre- and post-irrigation protocols as an effect measure. Thirty-five studies met the eligibility criteria and were included in the qualitative analysis, and seven studies were eligible for the network meta-analysis. The total sample consisted of 1,504 root canals. Among the tested solutions, apple cider vinegar combined with 2.5% NaOCl showed the highest probability of reducing CFUs after root canal irrigation (95%CI: -0.76-0.20), followed by 2% CHX and NaOCl (considering the different concentrations [95%CI: -0.32-0.17]). The bias assessment revealed significant omissions in reporting, particularly regarding sample size calculation, sample randomization, and operator blinding. The obtained evidence demonstrated that, even though NES did not overcome NaOCl, they have antimicrobial potential against Enterococcus faecalis.</p>","PeriodicalId":9240,"journal":{"name":"Brazilian oral research","volume":"38 ","pages":"e093"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Antimicrobial efficacy of natural-based endodontic solutions: a systematic review with a network meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Danilo Cassiano Ferraz, Anahi de Paula Melo, Felipe de Souza Matos, Luiz Renato Paranhos, Camilla Christian Gomes Moura, Cauane Blumenberg, Juliane Maria Guerreiro-Tanomaru, Mário Tanomaru-Filho\",\"doi\":\"10.1590/1807-3107bor-2024.vol38.0093\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This systematic review aims to provide preclinical evidence of the antimicrobial efficacy of natural endodontic solutions (NES) compared to sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) and chlorhexidine (CHX) against Enterococcus faecalis. The study followed the PRISMA guidelines and had a registered protocol (PROSPERO - CRD42021224022). The inclusion criteria comprised ex vivo studies simulating root canal irrigation to assess the standardized mean difference of colony-forming units (CFUs). Records were systematically identified in PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, SciELO, Web of Science, LILACS, DANS Easy, and BDTD databases in January 2024. The RoBDEMAT tool helped determine the risk of bias. As for the network meta-analysis, CFU data were collected pre- and post-irrigation protocols as an effect measure. Thirty-five studies met the eligibility criteria and were included in the qualitative analysis, and seven studies were eligible for the network meta-analysis. The total sample consisted of 1,504 root canals. Among the tested solutions, apple cider vinegar combined with 2.5% NaOCl showed the highest probability of reducing CFUs after root canal irrigation (95%CI: -0.76-0.20), followed by 2% CHX and NaOCl (considering the different concentrations [95%CI: -0.32-0.17]). The bias assessment revealed significant omissions in reporting, particularly regarding sample size calculation, sample randomization, and operator blinding. The obtained evidence demonstrated that, even though NES did not overcome NaOCl, they have antimicrobial potential against Enterococcus faecalis.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9240,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Brazilian oral research\",\"volume\":\"38 \",\"pages\":\"e093\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Brazilian oral research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-3107bor-2024.vol38.0093\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brazilian oral research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-3107bor-2024.vol38.0093","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本系统综述旨在为天然根管溶液(NES)与次氯酸钠(NaOCl)和氯己定(CHX)对粪肠球菌的抗菌效果提供临床前证据。该研究遵循PRISMA指南并有注册方案(PROSPERO - CRD42021224022)。纳入标准包括模拟根管灌洗的离体研究,以评估菌落形成单位(cfu)的标准化平均差异。于2024年1月在PubMed、Scopus、EMBASE、SciELO、Web of Science、LILACS、DANS Easy和BDTD数据库中系统检索记录。RoBDEMAT工具帮助确定了偏见的风险。在网络元分析方面,收集灌溉方案前后的CFU数据作为效果度量。35项研究符合资格标准,纳入定性分析,7项研究符合网络荟萃分析的资格。总样本包括1504根管。在试验溶液中,苹果醋和2.5% NaOCl对根管灌洗后降低CFUs的概率最高(95%CI: -0.76-0.20),其次是2% CHX和NaOCl(考虑到不同浓度[95%CI: -0.32-0.17])。偏倚评估显示报告中存在重大遗漏,特别是在样本量计算、样本随机化和操作者盲法方面。所获得的证据表明,尽管NES不能克服NaOCl,但它们对粪肠球菌具有抗菌潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Antimicrobial efficacy of natural-based endodontic solutions: a systematic review with a network meta-analysis.

This systematic review aims to provide preclinical evidence of the antimicrobial efficacy of natural endodontic solutions (NES) compared to sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) and chlorhexidine (CHX) against Enterococcus faecalis. The study followed the PRISMA guidelines and had a registered protocol (PROSPERO - CRD42021224022). The inclusion criteria comprised ex vivo studies simulating root canal irrigation to assess the standardized mean difference of colony-forming units (CFUs). Records were systematically identified in PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, SciELO, Web of Science, LILACS, DANS Easy, and BDTD databases in January 2024. The RoBDEMAT tool helped determine the risk of bias. As for the network meta-analysis, CFU data were collected pre- and post-irrigation protocols as an effect measure. Thirty-five studies met the eligibility criteria and were included in the qualitative analysis, and seven studies were eligible for the network meta-analysis. The total sample consisted of 1,504 root canals. Among the tested solutions, apple cider vinegar combined with 2.5% NaOCl showed the highest probability of reducing CFUs after root canal irrigation (95%CI: -0.76-0.20), followed by 2% CHX and NaOCl (considering the different concentrations [95%CI: -0.32-0.17]). The bias assessment revealed significant omissions in reporting, particularly regarding sample size calculation, sample randomization, and operator blinding. The obtained evidence demonstrated that, even though NES did not overcome NaOCl, they have antimicrobial potential against Enterococcus faecalis.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
4.00%
发文量
107
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信