The study aimed to determine the effect of different irrigation activation systems on the amount of apical debris extrusion in mandibular molar teeth with curved root canals. Sixty extracted mandibular molar teeth were instrumented with HyFlex EDM system and divided into four groups according to irrigation techniques: passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI), EDDY, photon‐initiated photoacoustic streaming (PIPS) and manual irrigation (MI). After the final irrigation, the extruded irrigants were collected into Eppendorf tubes of known weights. The amount of extruded debris was obtained by subtracting the weight from the initial weight of the tube. The Kruskal–Wallis test was used for statistical analysis. EDDY caused significantly more debris extrusion than the other irrigation activation systems (P < 0.001). PUI caused less apical debris extrusion but there was no statistical difference between PUI, PIPS and MI (P > 0.05). The EDDY activation system was associated with the highest amount of debris extrusion in curved root canals.
Background. This in vitro study compared the fracture resistance of roots instrumented either with ProTaper or One Shape rotary systems and filled with one of the silicate, epoxy resin or silicone-based sealers.
Methods. Sixty single-rooted extracted mandibular premolars were decoronated to a length of 13 mm and then randomly divided into two main groups (n=30) in terms of the rotary system used for preparation. Group 1 samples were instrumented with the ProTaper Universal system up to a master apical file of #F2, while samples in group 2 were enlarged with One Shape system. The two main groups were then divided into 3 subgroups in terms of the sealer used (n=10) and filled with guttapercha (either F2 or MM-GP points) of the rotary system used and one of the sealers as follows: group 1, BioRoot RCS + ProTaper F2 gutta-percha; group 2, AH Plus + ProTaper F2 gutta-percha; group 3, GuttaFlow + ProTaper F2 gutta-percha; group 4, BioRoot RCS+ MM-GP points; group 5, AH Plus + MM-GP points; and group 6, GuttaFlow + MM-GP points. Each specimen then underwent fracture testing by using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1.0 mm/min until the root fractured. Data were statistically analyzed. Results. Two-way ANOVA showed no significant differences between the groups. One Shape instruments showed significantly better fracture resistance compared to ProTaper instruments. Statistically, no significant difference was found between AHPlus, GuttaFlow and BioRoot RCS sealers. Conclusion. It can be concluded that the rotary system used for the instrumentation of teeth has some influence on the fracture resistance, while the root canal sealers do not have such an effect.
The aim of the present study was to investigate in the fractal dimension (FD) time‐dependent changes of periapical bone after two different apexification treatments in teeth with immature apices and apical periodontitis. This study included 55 cases treated with apexification. Cases were divided into two groups: a calcium hydroxide group and a mineral trioxide aggregate group. In each case, the lesion area was evaluated by fractal analysis on periapical radiographs obtained before and 1‐year after treatment via Image‐J program. The FD of each region of interest on the radiographs was calculated using the fractal analysis method. The data were statistically analysed. In both groups, the FD values increased compare to initial at 1‐year follow‐up after treatment (P < .05). There was no statistically significant difference between the groups in terms of the time‐dependent increase in FD values (P = 0.118). In the present study, time‐dependent changes in FD were independent of the apexification method.
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.