PubMed · 8064439
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
J T Biggs, F W Benenati. 1993. Treating obstructed root canals.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8064439/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
This study investigated the ability of a new instrument designed for root debridement, the Periosonic, to remove dentine compared to a hand curette and an ultrasonic scaler. The Periosonic system is a modification of the Micro-Megax endodontic system and uses modified files to remove plaque, calculus and tooth substance. The Periosonic has 2 file types; the Periosonic 1 is a more aggressive file for the removal of gross supra- and subgingival deposits, while the Periosonic 2 is a thinner more flexible file used for the removal of subgingival deposits. 40 human dentine specimens were ground flat and baseline measurements were made using a surfometer. The specimens were divided into 4 experimental groups and each group was treated with a hand curette, ultrasonic scaler, Periosonic 1 or 2 using 12, 1-s strokes. The specimens were remeasured blind in the surfometer. The curette removed 23.6 microm of dentine, the ultrasonic 6.8 microm, the Periosonic 1 18.8 microm and the Periosonic 2 12.5 microm. A qualitative assessment of the samples following mechanical preparation was also made. In conclusion, the Periosonic instrument does not remove more tooth substance than a conventional curette and may be a useful addition for the debridement of root surfaces.
Twenty-nine unprepared, vital teeth were used to evaluate the accuracy of the Root ZX in locating the root canal foramen. After extraction of the teeth, a scanning electron microscope analyzed the relation of the file tip to the foramen. The sample was divided into two groups (Group A and Group B) according to the presence of a normal apical foramen (along the root main axis) or of a lateral foramen (deviating from the root main axis). With a tolerance level of +/- 0.5 mm, a clinical accuracy rate of 82.75% was recorded in the total sample. With a +/- 1.0-mm tolerance level, an accuracy of 100% was found. The error in locating the apex was significantly smaller in cases with a normal apical foramen (Group A) than in cases with a lateral foramen (Group B) (p < 0.001). An accuracy of 100% at the +/- 0.5-mm tolerance level was registered in Group A.
A new generation of electronic apex locators (Endex) that operates in moistened canals has been developed lately. An experimental comparison of this apparatus with the real, tactile, and radiographic measurements of the root canal length has been conducted. Results show that tactile determination is highly inaccurate and that the Endex is as accurate as radiographic measurements. It also demonstrates that the nonreproducibility of radiographic measurements is statistically significant, whereas that of the Endex is not significant.