An in vitro comparison of the efficacy of the stepback technique versus a step-back/ultrasonic technique in human mandibular molarsComparacion In vitro de la eficacia de la tecnica escalonada versus la tecnica escalonada ultrasonica en Mòlares inferiores de humanos*,**
References (32)
The biomechanics of endodontic therapy
Dent Clin North Am
(1963)The importance of chemomechanical preparation of the root canal
Oral Surg
(1955)- et al.
The influence of the method of canal preparation on the quality of apical and coronal obturation
J Endodon
(1979) Morphology of root canals
J Am Dent Assoc
(1932)- et al.
Root canal morphology of the human mandibular first molar
Oral Surg
(1971) - et al.
The effect of serial preparation versus nonserial preparation on tissue removal in the root canals of extracted mandibular human molars
J Endodon
(1975) - et al.
A comparison of the efficacy of serial preparation versus Giromatic preparation
J Endodon
(1975) Histologic evaluation of different methods of enlarging the pulp canal space
J Endodon
(1976)Ultrasonic disinfection of the root canal
Oral Surg
(1976)- et al.
Ultrasonic versus hand filing of dentin: a quantitative study
Oral Surg
(1980)
A quantitative comparison of the ability of diamond and K-type files to remove dentin
Oral Surg
Evaluation of root canal debridement by the endosonic ultrasonic synergistic system
Oral Surg
A scanning electron microscope evaluation of root canal debridement with the endosonic ultrasonic synergistic system
Oral Surg
The effect of endosonic and hand manipulation on the amount of root canal material extruded
Oral Surg
An evaluation of postoperative pain incidence following endosonic and conventional root canal therapy
Oral Surg
A comparison of antimicrobial effectiveness of endosonic and hand root canal therapy
Oral Surg
Cited by (81)
Comparison of Smear Layer Removal Ability of QMix with Different Activation Techniques
2016, Journal of EndodonticsComparison of the self-adjusting file with rotary and hand instrumentation in long-oval-shaped root canals
2013, Journal of EndodonticsHistologic evaluation of canal and isthmus debridement efficacies of two different irrigant delivery techniques in a closed system
2011, Journal of EndodonticsCitation Excerpt :CUI removed significantly more debris in noninstrumented isthmuses than SNI at levels 1.0 to 2.2 mm. This trend is in agreement with results reported by previous in vivo (17, 20–22) and in vitro studies (15, 16, 18, 19). Previous in vivo studies (21, 22) found significantly cleaner canals and isthmuses with ultrasonic irrigation when compared with hand/rotary instrumentation.
Irrigation in Endodontics
2010, Dental Clinics of North AmericaEffectiveness of the EndoActivator System in Removing the Smear Layer after Root Canal Instrumentation
2010, Journal of EndodonticsInfluence of a passive sonic irrigation system on the elimination of bacteria from root canal systems: A clinical study
2010, Journal of EndodonticsCitation Excerpt :When a patient presents with a tooth that has been infected by bacteria causing periapical bone breakdown, the clinician must use all the means he/she has to kill and remove the invading bacteria and their inflammatory by-products from the canal system. In recent years, it has been suggested that files attached to ultrasonic handpieces be used to aid in the irrigation and debridement of infected root canals (20, 21). Recently, the EA has been recommended to enhance the cleaning efficacy of irrigation of root canal systems.
- *
This study was supported by research funding from the Ohio Association of Endodontists.
- **
This article was adapted from a thesis submitted by Dr. Goodman in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the MS degree at Ohio State University, Columbus, OH. A portion of this article was presented at the 41st Annual American Association of Endodontists meeting, Toronto, Canada, and was honored by a graduate student research award.
- 1
Dr. Goodman is in private practice limited to endodontics, Atlanta, GA. Dr. Reader is associate professor, Department of Endodontics, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH. Dr. Beck is associate professor, Department of Oral Diagnosis, Oral Medicine, Ohio State University. Dr. Melfi is professor and assistant dean, Department of Oral Biology, Ohio State University. Dr. Meyers is professor and chairman, Department of Endodontics, Ohio State University.