Shetty Nihar, Mathew Tony, Shetty Aditya, Hegde Mithra N, Attavar Shruthi
Nitte (Deemed to be University), AB Shetty Memorial Institute of Dental Sciences (ABSMIDS) Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Mangalore, India.
Evid Based Dent. 2022 Sep 8. doi: 10.1038/s41432-022-0800-7.
Aim To evaluate the efficacy of ozonated water as an irrigant in disinfection of the root canal system.Materials and methods This systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines and methodological studies were assessed through the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. All studies on extracted human teeth using ozonated water were considered for the study, whereas ex vivo studies, studies on animal dentition and studies which were published in languages other than English were excluded from the study. The search was carried out on various databases such as PubMed, Google Scholar and ScienceDirect within the last 15 years. The assessment of quality of the studies was performed under the following: 1) size of sample; 2) control group; 3) standardisation of procedure; 4) statistical analysis performed; 5) risk of bias.Results There were a total of 154 study results, out of which duplicates and full-text analysis were excluded. A total of seven studies were included in the systematic review. The results in one study by Cardoso et al. showed ozonated water was better at reducing microbial counts, while two other studies demonstrated the difference in reducing microbial counts when comparing ozonated water against other irrigants. The remaining four studies concluded that ozonated water did not perform better as compared to the other irrigants such as sodium hypochlorite and chlorhexidine.Discussion It could be concluded that ozonated water is not a better disinfecting irrigant than sodium hypochlorite and chlorhexidine in the disinfection of the root canal system; however, it had an almost comparable level of disinfection.
目的 评估臭氧水作为根管系统冲洗液的消毒效果。
材料与方法 本系统评价按照PRISMA指南进行，方法学研究通过Cochrane偏倚风险工具进行评估。纳入所有使用臭氧水对拔除的人牙进行研究的文献，排除体外研究、动物牙列研究以及非英文发表的研究。在过去15年内在PubMed、谷歌学术和ScienceDirect等多个数据库进行检索。研究质量评估基于以下方面：1）样本量；2）对照组；3）操作标准化；4）进行的统计分析；5）偏倚风险。
结果 共获得154项研究结果，其中排除重复项和全文分析。系统评价共纳入7项研究。Cardoso等人的一项研究结果表明，臭氧水在减少微生物数量方面效果更好，而另外两项研究表明，将臭氧水与其他冲洗液比较时，在减少微生物数量方面存在差异。其余四项研究得出结论，与次氯酸钠和氯己定等其他冲洗液相比，臭氧水效果并不更好。
讨论 可以得出结论，在根管系统消毒方面，臭氧水并非比次氯酸钠和氯己定更好的消毒冲洗液；然而，其消毒水平几乎相当。
