In this study, we compared the antimicrobial efficacy of various root canal preparation techniques and instruments in the root canals of 40 human first maxillary premolars extracted for orthodontic reasons. After extirpation of the pulp, teeth were sterilized in an autoclave. Then, the root canals were infected with Enterococcus faecalis suspension and the teeth incubated at 37 degrees C for 24 h. Thereafter, the teeth were divided into five groups: preparation with K-file or K-Nitiflex file (step-back technique; groups 1 and 2), K-reamer (standardization technique; group 3), irrigation only (group 4), and no treatment (group 5). Before and after treatments, samples were taken for culture. Results were evaluated after 24-h incubation in E67 selective culture medium. We observed a considerable reduction in bacterial population after mechanical preparation. No significant differences were seen among the efficacy of the various preparation techniques and files used.
Knowledge of the course of the mandibular canal and its anatomic variations is of great importance in oral surgery, especially in preprosthetic operations and the insertion of endosteal implants and during the planning of removable dentures prepared in cases involving extensively atrophied mandibles. We review the literature on duplicated mandibular canals, which is based exclusively on radiologic findings. Then, we compare this with an examination of dry mandibles and further radiologic studies. The incidence of duplicated mandibular canals observed in macroscopic examinations of mandibles was substantially higher than that revealed by radiographs. One case involving a novel variation, a triple mandibular canal, is reported.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.