Displaying all 5 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Nagendrababu V, Kishen A, Murray PE, Nekoofar MH, de Figueiredo JAP, Priya E, et al.
    Int Endod J, 2021 Jun;54(6):848-857.
    PMID: 33450080 DOI: 10.1111/iej.13477
    Animal testing is crucial in situations when research on humans is not allowed because of unknown health risks and ethical concerns. The current project aims to develop reporting guidelines exclusively for animal studies in Endodontology, using an established consensus-based methodology. The guidelines have been named: Preferred Reporting Items for Animal Studies in Endodontology (PRIASE) 2021. Nine individuals (PD, VN, AK, PM, MN, JF, EP, JJ and SJ), including the project leaders (PD, VN) formed a steering committee. The steering committee developed a novel checklist by adapting and integrating their animal testing and peer review experience with the Animals in Research: Reporting In Vivo Experiments (ARRIVE) guidelines and also the Clinical and Laboratory Images in Publications (CLIP) principles. A PRIASE Delphi Group (PDG) and PRIASE Online Meeting Group (POMG) were also formed. Thirty-one PDG members participated in the online Delphi process and achieved consensus on the checklist items and flowchart that were used to formulate the PRIASE guidelines. The novel PRIASE 2021 guidelines were discussed with the POMG on 9 September 2020 via a Zoom online video call attended by 21 individuals from across the globe and seven steering committee members. Following the discussions, the guidelines were modified and then piloted by several authors whilst writing a manuscript involving research on animals. The PRIASE 2021 guidelines are a checklist consisting of 11 domains and 43 individual items together with a flowchart. The PRIASE 2021 guidelines are focused on improving the methodological principles, reproducibility and quality of animal studies in order to enhance their reliability as well as repeatability to estimate the effects of endodontic treatments and usefulness for guiding future clinical studies on humans.
  2. Elnawawy HM, Kutty MG, Yahya NA, Kasim NHA, Cooper PR, Camilleri J, et al.
    Dent Mater J, 2024 Sep 10.
    PMID: 39261022 DOI: 10.4012/dmj.2024-015
    This study compared the chemical and physical properties of an experimental radiopaque white Portland cement (REPC) with reduced particle size to ProRoot white mineral trioxide aggregate (WMTA). The particle size distribution of experimental Portland cement (EPC) was examined, and then nano-zirconium oxide (nano-ZrO) was added to produce REPC. Chemical analysis, initial setting time, pH values, and push-out bond strength were evaluated. Results showed that REPC had smallest particle size (354.5±26.45 nm), while PC had the largest (1,309.67±60.54 nm) (p<0.05). Differences in chemical composition were observed. REPC exhibited shorter setting time (32.7±0.58 min) compared to WMTA (131.67±2.89 min) and PC (163.33±2.89 min) (p<0.05). All groups showed alkaline pH (p<0.05). REPC demonstrated the highest push-out bond strength (22.24±4.33 MPa) compared with WMTA (15.53±3.26 MPa) and PC (16.8±5.43 MPa) (p<0.05). This cost-effective PC formulation reduced the setting time and increased the push-out bond strength while maintaining the alkaline properties of the original cements.
  3. Nagendrababu V, Murray PE, Ordinola-Zapata R, Peters OA, Rôças IN, Siqueira JF, et al.
    Int Endod J, 2021 Sep;54(9):1482-1490.
    PMID: 33938010 DOI: 10.1111/iej.13542
    Reproducible, skilfully conducted and unbiased laboratory studies provide new knowledge, which can inform clinical research and eventually translate into better patient care. To help researchers improve the quality and reproducibility of their research prior to a publication peer-review, this paper describes the process that was followed during the development of the Preferred Reporting Items for Laboratory studies in Endodontology (PRILE) 2021 guidelines and which used a well-documented consensus-based methodology. A steering committee was created with eight individuals (PM, RO, OP, IR, JS, EP, JJ and SP), plus the project leaders (PD, VN). The steering committee prepared an initial checklist by combining and adapting items from the modified Consolidated Statement of Reporting Trials checklist for reporting in vitro studies of dental materials and the Clinical and Laboratory Images in Publications principles as well as adding several new items. The steering committee then formed a PRILE Delphi Group (PDG) and PRILE Online Meeting Group (POMG) to provide expert advice and feedback on the initial draft checklist and flowchart. The members of the PDG participated in an online Delphi process to achieve consensus on the items within the PRILE 2021 checklist and the accompanying flowchart for clarity and suitability. The PRILE checklist and flowchart developed by the online Delphi process were discussed further by the POMG. This online meeting was conducted on 12 February 2021 via the Zoom platform. Following this meeting, the steering committee developed a final version of the PRILE 2021 guidelines and flowchart, which was piloted by several authors when writing up a laboratory study for publication. Authors are encouraged to use the PRILE 2021 guidelines and flowchart to improve the clarity, completeness and quality of reports describing laboratory studies in Endodontology. The PRILE 2021 checklist and flowchart are freely available and downloadable from the Preferred Reporting Items for study Designs in Endodontology website (http://pride-endodonticguidelines.org/prile/).
  4. Majeed R, Elnawawy HM, Kutty MG, Yahya NA, Azami NH, Abu Kasim NH, et al.
    Odontology, 2023 Oct;111(4):759-776.
    PMID: 36864211 DOI: 10.1007/s10266-023-00786-0
    This systematic review evaluated the effects of nano-sized cement particles on the properties of calcium silicate-based cements (CSCs). Using defined keywords, a literature search was conducted to identify studies that investigated properties of nano-calcium silicate-based cements (NCSCs). A total of 17 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Results indicated that NCSC formulations have favourable physical (setting time, pH and solubility), mechanical (push out bond strength, compressive strength and indentation hardness) and biological (bone regeneration and foreign body reaction) properties compared with commonly used CSCs. However, the characterization and verification for the nano-particle size of NCSCs were deficient in some studies. Furthermore, the nanosizing was not limited to the cement particles and a number of additives were present. In conclusion, the evidence available for the properties of CSC particles in the nano-range is deficient-such properties could be a result of additives which may have enhanced the properties of the material.
Related Terms
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links