ArticleEuropean journal of medical research2025
The antibacterial effect of chlorohexidine, Er:YAG laser and diode laser 980 nm as dental cavity disinfectants of dentine: an in vitro study.
Article in European journal of medical research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesComparison between different disinfection modalities in reducing Streptococcus mutans count within dental cavities. RESEARCH QUESTION: whether using an antibacterial agent has a value in reducing the bacterial load in the dental cavity and what is the best modality. Cariogenic bacteria can remain viable in the dentine even after complete removal of caries, so the use of cavity disinfectants before restoration placement is crucial, such as chlorohexidine, Er:YAG and Diode laser 980 nm. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the antibacterial effect of chlorohexidine, Er:YAG and diode laser 980 nm as cavity disinfectants.
methodsForty sound extracted human primary molars were randomly assigned to four groups (ten teeth in each group); group I: (negative control): no disinfection was applied, group II: (positive control): application of 2% chlorhexidine gluconate solution, group III: a 980 nm diode laser (LASOTRONIX, Poland) was used at 1 W in continuous wave mode, and group IV: an Er:YAG laser was used at a, power 1.2 W. The antibacterial efficacy against Streptococcus mutans bacteria was assessed via colony forming units (CFU) and optical density of bacteria before treatment and after treatment.
resultsA statistically significant increase in bacterial count was observed in the negative control group (Gp1). Treatment groups 2, 3, and 4 showed a significant reduction in bacterial count from baseline to post-treatment.Er:YAG group showed the highest percentage of reduction of bacterial count with a statistically significant difference with other groups. No statistically significant difference was shown between chlorohexidine and diode laser groups.
conclusionsThe Er:YAG laser demonstrated the highest antibacterial efficacy against Streptococcus mutans when compared with chlorhexidine and the diode laser (980 nm). Although all three disinfection methods showed significant antibacterial activity. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The superior antibacterial performance of the Er:YAG laser supports its use in clinical practice for managing deep carious lesions. These findings highlight the importance of thorough cavity disinfection before restoration placement to minimize bacterial persistence and reduce the risk of secondary caries. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: not applicable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.