Spelling suggestions: "subject:"coactivator®"" "subject:"inactivator®""
1 |
Comparison Of Root Canal Irrigation Systems In Reducing Intracanal Microorganisms Using Saline-An In Vitro StudyDesai, Pranav 03 May 2012 (has links)
Mechanical and chemical debridement plays an important role in reducing intracanal microorganisms. Effective root canal irrigation depends on both the root canal irrigant and irrigation system. The objective of this study was to evaluate the debridement efficiency of four root canal irrigation systems, Endovac®, PiezoFlow™, EndoActivator® and traditional needle irrigation using saline as an irrigant. Seventy-five, single canal, extracted, mature teeth were selected. Teeth were standardized to canal lengths of 15 mm and instrumented to Master Apical File size #40 with 4% taper. Teeth were mounted in a centrifuge tube using PVS impression material. Teeth were randomly divided into four experimental groups (n=15) and one control group (n=15). The root canals were inoculated with 24-hour culture of Streptococcus mutans and incubated for 72 hours. Saline was delivered via each of the irrigation systems at the rate of 7 ml/min using a precision syringe pump. Immediately following the treatment, samples were collected from the untreated control and the experimental groups and plated on agar plates. Results were analyzed using repeated measures ANOVA and Tukey’s HSD multiple comparison tests. All the experimental groups were significantly better than the control group (p<0.0001). Among the experimental groups, Endovac® and PiezoFlow™ were significantly better in reducing microorganisms compared to needle and EndoActivator® groups (p<0.05). There was no statistical difference between Endovac® and PiezoFlow™. Debridement efficiency of Endovac® and PiezoFlow™ is better than needle and EndoActivator® irrigation systems using saline as an irrigant. Funded by Alexander Fellowship, VCU School of Dentistry.
|
2 |
Vergleichende Untersuchung der Effektivität vier verschiedener Spültechniken zur Entfernung eines Wurzelkanalsealers / Comparative analysis of the efficiency of four different rinsing-techniques for removal of a root canal sealerGrischke, Jasmin 05 October 2011 (has links)
No description available.
|
3 |
Antibakterielle Wirksamkeit schall- und ultraschallaktivierter Wurzelkanalspülungen auf einen Enterococcus faecalis-Biofilm / Comparison of the antibacterial efficacy of sonic- and two ultrasonic-activated irrigation techniques in reducing intracanal Enterococcus faecalis populationsZimmermann, Felix 18 September 2018 (has links)
No description available.
|
4 |
Vergleich der Wirkung unterschiedlicher endodontischer Spül- und Reinigungssysteme (Handspülung, Ultraschall, EndoActivator®, CanalBrush®) auf die Sauberkeit präparierter Wurzelkanalwände / Comparison of the effect of different endodontic irrigation and cleaning systems (dynamic syringe irrigation, passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI), EndoActivator®, CanalBrush®) of the cleanliness of prepared root canal wallsDöllmann, Stefan 23 April 2010 (has links)
No description available.
|
5 |
Untersuchung neuer Techniken zur Entfernung von Kalziumhydroxid aus dem Wurzelkanalsystem gerader Wurzelkanäle / Efficacy of different irrigation techniques in the removal of calcium hydroxide from simulated grooves in straight root canalsSchmidt, Anne-Kathrin 17 January 2012 (has links)
No description available.
|
6 |
An in-vitro SEM study comparing the debridement efficacy of the Endoactivator™ system versus the Ultrasonic Bypass™ system following hand-rotary instrumentationBinkley, Steven Wayne, 1975- January 2010 (has links)
Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the debridement efficacy
of the EndoActivator (Dentsply Tulsa Dental, Tulsa, OK) versus the Ultrasonic Bypass
system (Vista Dental) following hand-rotary instrumentation in anterior teeth. Sixty
extracted human, maxillary anterior teeth were randomly assigned to three groups. Teeth
were instrumented using (ISO k-flex) hand files and EndoSequence nickel-titanium
rotary files (Brasseler, Savannah, GA) to a size 40/.06 taper. Group 1 served as the
control group and had no additional treatment performed. Groups 2 and 3 were subjected
to a final irrigating regimen that consisted of 6-percent sodium hypochlorite for a 1-
minute duration. For group 2 the irrigation solution was activated for 1 minute using the
EndoActivator system (DENTSPLY). For group 3, the irrigation solution was activated
for 1 minute using the Ultrasonic Bypass System (Vista Dental). The teeth were then
sectioned longitudinally and each half was divided into three equal parts 3 mm from the
anatomic apex. The sample with the most visibly identifiable section of the apex was
used for SEM evaluation. A scoring system to measure the efficacy of debris removal
was utilized to quantify the results. Statistical analysis was performed using the Kruskal-
Wallis test. If the overall test is significant, a Wilcoxon Rank Sum tests was used to
compare each pair of groups.
The results of this study indicate that both the EndoActivator and Ultrasonic
Bypass groups had a smaller percentage of canal space occupied by smear layer and
debris when compared with the control group at all three levels. This difference was
statistically significant for the Ultrasonic Bypass System when compared with the control
at both the coronal and middle thirds of the samples evaluated. This difference was not
statistically significant in the apical third. When compared with the EndoActivator, the
Ultrasonic Bypass System produced cleaner canals in the coronal and middle thirds, with
the difference being statistically significant in the middle third only.
These results of this research support the use of either of these two devices when
compared with the controls. Smear layer removal and debridement efficacy was greatly
increased when using either sonic or ultrasonic activation of sodium hypochlorite. More
research is warranted concerning these two devices. Examining the antimicrobial
efficacy with the use of these two devices could lend additional validation to their use in
non-surgical endodontic therapy.
|
Page generated in 0.0572 seconds