Ferreira-Reguera Ana, Ferreira Inês, Pina-Vaz Irene, Martín-Biedma Benjamín, Martín-Cruces José
Faculty of Dentistry, University of Santiago de Compostela, 15782 Galicia, Spain.
Faculty of Dental Medicine, University of Porto, 4200-393 Porto, Portugal.
Medicina (Kaunas). 2025 Jan 14;61(1):114. doi: 10.3390/medicina61010114.
: This systematic review aimed to compare the effect of chitosan in smear layer removal with other commonly used chelators during root canal treatment. : The PRISMA guidelines were followed. Ex vivo studies performed in non-endodontically treated extracted human permanent teeth with a fully formed apex, in which sodium hypochlorite was the main irrigant and chitosan was used as final irrigation to observe its capacity to remove the smear layer using a Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM), were included. In addition, reviews, letters, opinion articles, conference abstracts, book chapters, or articles that did not use a control group were excluded. A literature search was undertaken without limits on time or language, until February 2024, in PubMed-MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and in the electronic archives of four endodontic journals. The risk of bias was evaluated by adapting the risk of bias assessment used in a previous study. Study selection, data collection, and synthesis were performed and the risk of bias was assessed by two independent reviewers. : Six studies fulfilled the eligibility criteria and were included. Four studies found chitosan to be as effective as EDTA and one paper showed it was more effective than EDTA and MTAD; however, one article found it to be comparable to citric acid. The overall risk of bias was medium. Quantitative analysis of the results was not possible due to the heterogeneity found between the study methodologies of the included articles. : Within the limitations of this study, 0.2% chitosan may be considered as a promising irrigation solution when employed as a final irrigant in order to remove the smear layer. Nonetheless, a standardized protocol for the use of chelators in root canal treatment should be established in future studies.
本系统评价旨在比较壳聚糖在根管治疗中去除玷污层的效果与其他常用螯合剂的效果。遵循PRISMA指南。纳入了在未进行牙髓治疗的、根尖完全形成的拔除的人类恒牙上进行的体外研究,其中次氯酸钠为主要冲洗剂,壳聚糖用作最终冲洗剂,使用扫描电子显微镜(SEM)观察其去除玷污层的能力。此外,排除了综述、信件、观点文章、会议摘要、书籍章节或未使用对照组的文章。在PubMed-MEDLINE、Scopus、Web of Science以及四种牙髓病学杂志的电子存档中进行了不限时间和语言的文献检索,直至2024年2月。通过采用先前研究中使用的偏倚风险评估方法来评估偏倚风险。由两名独立 reviewers 进行研究选择、数据收集和综合,并评估偏倚风险。六项研究符合纳入标准并被纳入。四项研究发现壳聚糖与乙二胺四乙酸(EDTA)效果相当,一篇论文表明壳聚糖比EDTA和甲基丙烯酸甲酯-四环素-酸性蚀刻剂(MTAD)更有效;然而,一篇文章发现壳聚糖与柠檬酸相当。总体偏倚风险为中等。由于纳入文章的研究方法之间存在异质性,无法对结果进行定量分析。在本研究的局限性内,0.2%的壳聚糖作为最终冲洗剂用于去除玷污层时,可被视为一种有前景的冲洗液。尽管如此,未来的研究应建立根管治疗中螯合剂使用的标准化方案。