METHODOLOGY: Dental pulp stem cells from healthy (DPSCs) and carious teeth (DPSCs-CT) were isolated from young donors. Both cell lines were expanded in identical culture conditions and subsequently differentiated towards DAergic-like cells using pre-defined dopaminergic cocktails. The dopaminergic efficiencies were evaluated both at gene and protein as well as at secretome levels.
RESULTS: The efficiency of DPSCs-CT to differentiate into DAergic-like cells was not equivalent to that of DPSCs. This was further reflected in both gene and protein generation whereby key neuronal markers such as nestin, NURR1 and beta-III-tubulin were expressed significantly lower as compared to differentiated DPSCs (P
METHODOLOGY: A total of 700 maxillary premolars were examined using CBCT in an Egyptian subpopulation. The number of roots was identified, and root canal configurations were classified according to Vertucci's classification and a new system for classifying root and canal morphology. In addition, the position where roots bifurcated and the levels where canals merged or diverged were identified. Fisher's exact test and independent t-test were used for statistical analysis, and the level of significance was set at 0.05 (P = 0.05).
RESULTS: More than half of maxillary first premolars were double-rooted, and the majority of maxillary second premolars were single-rooted (P
METHODOLOGY: The Clarivate Analytics' Web of Science 'All Databases', Elsevier's Scopus, Google Scholar and PubMed Central were searched to retrieve the 50 most-cited articles in the IEJ published from April 1967 to December 2018. The articles were analysed and information including number of citations, year of publication, contributing authors, institutions and countries, study design, study topic, impact factor and keywords was extracted.
RESULTS: The number of citations of the 50 selected papers varied from 575 to 130 (Web of Science), 656 to164 (Elsevier's Scopus), 1354 to 199 (Google Scholar) and 123 to 3 (PubMed). The majority of papers were published in the year 2001 (n = 7). Amongst 102 authors, the greatest contribution was made by four contributors that included Gulabivala K (n = 4), Ng YL (n = 4), Pitt Ford TR (n = 4) and Wesselink PR (n = 4). The majority of papers originated from the United Kingdom (n = 8) with most contributions from King's College London Dental Institute (UK) and Eastman Dental Hospital, London. Reviews were the most common study design (n = 19) followed by Clinical Research (n = 16) and Basic Research (n = 15). The majority of topics covered by the most-cited articles were Outcome Studies (n = 9), Intracanal medicaments (n = 8), Endodontic microbiology (n = 7) and Canal instrumentation (n = 7). Amongst 76 unique keywords, Endodontics (n = 7), Mineral Trioxide Aggregate (MTA) (n = 7) and Root Canal Treatment (n = 7) were the most frequently used.
CONCLUSION: This is the first study to identify and analyse the top 50 most-cited articles in a specific professional journal within Dentistry. The analysis has revealed information regarding the development of the IEJ over time as well as scientific progress in the field of Endodontology.
METHODOLOGY: The Clarivate Analytics' Web of Science 'All Databases' was used to search and analyse the 100 most frequently cited randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews and meta-analyses having 'randomized', 'randomised', 'randomized controlled', 'randomised controlled', 'randomized controlled trial', 'randomized controlled trials', 'clinical trial', 'systematic', 'systematic review', 'meta-analysis', and 'meta-analyses' in the title section. The 'International Endodontic Journal', 'Journal of Endodontics', 'Oral Surgery Oral Medicine Oral Pathology Oral Radiology and Endodontology', 'Australian Endodontic Journal', 'Endodontics & Dental Traumatology', 'Endo-Endodontic Practice Today' and 'European Endodontic Journal' were included in the publication name section. After ranking the articles in a descending order based on their citation counts, each article was cross-matched with the citation counts in Elsevier's Scopus and Google Scholar. The articles were analysed, and information on citation counts, citation density, year of publication, contributing authors, institutions and countries, journal of publication, study design, topic of the article and keywords was extracted.
RESULTS: The citation counts of the 100 most-cited articles varied from 235 to 20 (Web of Science), 276 to 17 (Scopus) and 696 to 1 (Google Scholar). The year in which the top 100 articles were published was 2010 (n = 13). Among 373 authors, the greatest number of articles was associated with three individuals namely Reader A (n = 5), Beck M (n = 5) and Kvist T (n = 5). Most of the articles originated from the United States (n = 24) with the greatest contribution from Ohio State University (USA) (n = 5). Randomized controlled trials were the most frequent study design (n = 45) followed by systematic reviews (n = 30) with outcome studies of root canal treatment being the major topic (n = 35). The Journal of Endodontics published the largest number of included articles (n = 70) followed by the International Endodontic Journal (n = 27). Among 259 unique keywords, meta-analysis (n = 23) and systematic review (n = 23) were the most frequently used.
CONCLUSION: This study has revealed that year of publication had no obvious impact on citation count. The bibliometric analysis highlighted the quantity and quality of research, and the evolution of scientific advancements made in the field of Endodontology over time. Articles before 1996, that is prior to the CONSORT statement that encouraged authors to include specific terms in the title and keywords, may not have been included in this electronic search.
METHODOLOGY: A cohort (n = 206) of fourth-year undergraduate dental students were recruited from four different Dental Schools and divided randomly into two groups (Group A and B). The participants assessed six test endodontic cases using anonymized versions of the American Association of Endodontists (AAE) case difficulty assessment form (AAE Endodontic Case Difficulty Assessment Form and Guidelines, 2006) and EndoApp, a web-based CDA tool. Group A (n = 107) used the AAE form for assessment of the first three cases, followed by EndoApp for the latter. Group B (n = 99) used EndoApp for the initial three cases and switched to the AAE form for the remainder. Data were collected online and analysed to assess participants' knowledge reinforcement and agreement with the recommendation generated. Statistical analysis was performed using the two-way mixed model anova, Cohen's Kappa (κ) and independent t-tests, with the levels of significance set at P
AIM: To identify whether articaine or lidocaine is the most appropriate local anaesthetic solution for teeth with irreversible pulpitis undergoing root canal treatment.
DATA SOURCE: The protocol of this umbrella review is registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42019137624). PubMed, EBSCHO host and Scopus databases were searched until June 2019.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS: Systematic reviews published in English comparing the effectiveness of local anaesthesia following administration of articaine or lidocaine in patients undergoing root canal treatment of teeth diagnosed with irreversible pulpitis were included. Two independent reviewers selected the studies and carried out the data extraction and the appraisal of the included reviews. Disagreements were resolved in consultation with a third reviewer.
STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: The quality of the included reviews was appraised by two independent reviewers using the AMSTAR tool (a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews). Each of the 11 AMSTAR items was given a score of 1 if the specific criterion was met, or 0 if the criterion was not met or the information was unclear.
RESULTS: Five systematic reviews with meta-analyses were included. The AMSTAR score for the reviews ranged from 8 to 11, out of a maximum score of 11, and all reviews were categorized as 'high' quality. Two reviews scored 0 for item 8 in AMSTAR because the scientific quality of the clinical trials included in these reviews was not used in the formulation of the conclusions.
LIMITATIONS: Systematic reviews published only in the English language were included. Only a small number of studies were available to assess pain intensity during the injection phase, the time until the onset of anaesthesia and the occurrence of adverse events.
CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS: Articaine is more effective than lidocaine for local anaesthesia of teeth with irreversible pulpitis undergoing root canal treatment. There is limited evidence that injection of articaine is less painful, has more rapid onset and has fewer adverse events compared with lidocaine.