Objective:The aim of this study was to evaluate the biomechanical preparation of flattened root canals using the following systems: Endo-Eze AET stainless steel oscillatory instruments (Ultradent) and RaCe rotary NiTi instruments (FKG Dentaire).Materials and Methods:Twenty extracted human mandibular incisors were randomly assigned to two groups: Group 1 - Instrumentation with oscillatory Endo-Eze AET files (oscillatory technique); Group 2 - Instrumentation with rotary NiTi RaCe files (rotary technique). The teeth were decoronated, had their apices and coronal openingssealed with sticky wax and were embedded in crystal-clear orthophtalic polyester resin. The roots were sectioned transversally with diamond discs at 10 mm (middle third) and 5 mm (apical third) from the apex and the segments were reassembled for instrumentation. The sections were photographed before and after root canal instrumentation and evaluated with respect to whether the original root canal shape was modified by instrumentation. To evaluate the differences in the root canal shape before and after biomechanical preparation, scores were given regarding the instruments touch on the intracanal walls.Results:In middle third of the root canals instrumented with the rotary system, there was a change in the original canal anatomy (p<0.05), with formation of a protuberance in the mesiodistal direction. This protuberance did not occur when the oscillatory instrumentation was used. The oscillatory system had better results in the middle and apical thirds as evaluated by Dunn’s multiple-comparison test (p>0.05).Conclusion:Under the tested conditions, Endo-Eze oscillatory system yielded the instrumentation of all flattened root canal walls, maintaining the canal original shape throughout the biomechanical preparation, and was more effective than RaCe rotary system.
The aim of this study was to evaluate, clinically and histologically, the influence of laser and LED photobiomodulation in the healing of formocresol-induced oral mucosa ulcers of rats. We used 60 Wistar rats in which oral ulcers were induced on the gingiva of the lower incisors. Forty-eight hours after inducing the ulcers, the animals were divided into three groups: laser, LED, and untreated. Animals from the laser group received irradiation with GaAlAs, 660 nm, CW, 40 mW, φ 4 mm(2), 4.8 J/cm(2). Animals from the LED group received irradiation with InGaAIP, 630 nm, 150 mW, 4.8 J/cm(2), 0.8 cm spot. Forty-eight hours after oral ulcer induction, both irradiations were applied in a punctuate manner in the center of the ulcer at 48-h interval until the end of the experimental period. The animals were killed at 3, 5, 7, and 11 days after day 0. The results of the clinical evaluation showed that the laser and LED phototherapies were able to accelerate the healing of formocresol-induced oral ulcers, which occurred first in the laser group (ANOVA, p < 0.05). Histologically, there was a slight variation between LED and laser therapy; therefore, the laser group proved to be effective in accelerating wound healing, especially at 5 days, whereas the LED group was more effective at the end of the experimental period. It was concluded that laser and LED photobiomodulation were effective in accelerating the healing of formocresol-induced oral ulcers in both clinical and histological aspects.
Introduction:This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of two activated irrigation techniques in removing the smear layer after single-file reciprocating instrumentation in curved canals.Materials and Methods:Sixty distobuccal roots of maxillary molars were standardized to create a closed system, and then instrumented using WaveOne Primary (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland) instruments. Fifty-four specimens were randomly distributed into 3 groups for final irrigation: Non-activated irrigation, passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI), and EndoActivator (EA;Dentsply Maillefer, Tulsa, USA) irrigation. All specimens received 3 mL of 17% EDTA for 1 minute, followed by irrigation with 6 mL of 2.5% NaOCl. The apical, middle and cervical thirds of the specimens were analyzed using scanning electronic microscopy (SEM), and the amount of remaining smear layer on the canal walls was rated by three examiners using a five-category scoring system. Kendall’s concordance coefficient was used to assess inter-rater agreement. Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney (Bonferroni) tests were used to compare the scores.Results:Kendall’s concordance coefficient was ≥ 0.7, indicating an excellent level of agreement between the raters. No statistically significant difference in irrigation techniques efficacy for removal of the smear layer (p=0.061) was found for the apical third. The scores attributed to the specimens irrigated with the EA system were significantly lower than those of the other groups in the cervical and middle thirds (p< 0.05).Conclusions:The efficacy of the EA system in removing the smear layer in the cervical and middle thirds of root canals instrumented with reciprocating motion was significantly higher than that of either PUI or non-activated irrigation. Both EA and PUI performed similarly in apical third.
ObjectiveTo evaluate in vitro the sealing ability of three materials used as cervical barrier for internal dental bleaching. Methods Thirty Results No statistically significant difference was found between the study groups, however, the largest number of specimens with a lower degree of leakage were found in the Coltosol group. ConclusionAll the materials evaluated for making the cervical cap allowed some level of leakage.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.