Comparison of apical extrusion of sodium hypochlorite in immature teeth after needle irrigation, ultrasonic irrigation, EDDY, Er:YAG, and diode lasers.

This study aimed to assess the apical extrusion of sodium hypochlorite in immature teeth caused by needle irrigation, ultrasonic irrigation, EDDY, Er:YAG, and diode lasers. Seventy-five human maxillary anterior teeth were selected. After the apical 3 mm of the roots was resected, the canal lumen was enlarged with #2 to #5 Gates-Glidden burs. The teeth were fixed to the lid of a flat-sided clear plastic container, and the plastic containers were filled with 0.2% agarose gel containing 1 mL of 0.1% m-cresol purple. Then, the specimens were allocated into five groups according to the irrigation activation techniques: needle irrigation, ultrasonic irrigation, EDDY, Er:YAG laser, and diode laser. The apical extrusion of sodium hypochlorite caused the color change in the gel. The containers were digitally photographed, and the percentage of pixels of irrigant extrusion (the color change) in each photograph was calculated. The diode laser group showed a significantly lower percentage of pixels than needle irrigation, EDDY, and Er:YAG laser (p < 0.05). The irrigant extrusion value of the ultrasonic irrigation group was significantly lower than that of the EDDY and Er:YAG laser groups (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference between the other groups (p > 0.05). All the groups caused irrigant extrusion in the immature teeth. The diode laser and ultrasonic irrigation caused less sodium hypochlorite extrusion than EDDY and Er:YAG laser. The needle irrigation showed more irrigant extrusion than the only diode laser group.

Difficulties experienced by endodontics researchers in conducting studies and writing papers.

Objectives: The study investigated the difficulties experienced by endodontics researchers around the world in conducting studies and writing papers. Materials and Methods: A survey consisting of 18 questions on the difficulties experienced by endodontics researchers in performing studies and writing papers was e-mailed to academics in the field of endodontics working at 202 universities. The independent risk factors were analyzed using binary logistic regression at a significance level of 0.05. Results: A total of 581 individuals (10.7%) agreed to participate in the study. Almost half the participants (48.2%) reported that they had received some type of training in conducting studies and writing papers. In response to the question, "Do you get help from a statistician to perform the statistical analyses of your studies?," 77.1% answered "yes." Around 40% of the participants stated that the need to obtain ethical approval negatively affected their desire to conduct studies. The participants' regions had no effect on the reported difficulties associated with writing papers in English or conducting statistical analyses (p > 0.05). Most participants (81.8%) reported difficulties in writing the Discussion section, regardless of their region, academic degrees, or years of experience. Conclusions: The participants stated they experienced difficulties in many areas, such as conducting statistical analyses, finding new ideas, and writing in English. Engaging in a detailed examination of ethics committee rules, expanding biostatistics education, increasing the number of institutions providing research funding, and increasing the number of endodontics journals can increase the enthusiasm of endodontics researchers to publish papers.