Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros











Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
J Dent Educ ; 76(6): 759-64, 2012 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22659705

RESUMO

The purpose of this article is to describe a simple and versatile aid for the endodontic treatment of extracted teeth and its possible applications. The Med*-box is a new endodontic multipurpose device made of transparent acrylic that permits all elements of root canal treatment to be performed and evaluated either visually or radiologically. The Med*-box represents a valuable addition to the spectrum of educational and practical means in endodontic training. It is well suited for students, dentists, and endodontists for learning the handling of new materials, methods, and instruments in endodontics before they work clinically upon a patient. Also in the context of scientific endodontic issues, the Med*-box represents a simple, economical, and easily manageable aid.


Assuntos
Equipamentos Odontológicos , Educação em Odontologia , Endodontia/educação , Endodontia/instrumentação , Odontometria/instrumentação , Radiografia Dentária/instrumentação , Educação Continuada em Odontologia , Alemanha , Humanos , Tratamento do Canal Radicular/instrumentação , Materiais de Ensino , Ápice Dentário/anatomia & histologia
2.
J Endod ; 36(10): 1669-72, 2010 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20850674

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: An exact determination of the apical root canal diameter is crucial for correct cleaning and shaping of a root canal. The aim of this study was to investigate the discrepancies of the initial apical root canal diameter and the diameter that is measured by the initial apical file (IAF) after cervical flaring using current rotary nickel-titanium systems. METHODS: Mesiobuccal canals of 40 extracted mandibular molars were randomly assigned to four groups. In the first group, root canals were not flared. Root canals of the other groups were preflared using FlexMaster (VDW, Munich, Germany), ProTaper (Dentsply, Konstanz, Germany), or RaCe (FKG Dentaire, Genf, Switzerland) instruments. The tooth length was determined by inserting an ISO 06 K-file to the apical foramen. The working length (WL) was set 1 mm short of the apical foramen. File sizes were increased after binding sensation was felt at the WL. Transversal sections of the WL regions were examined under stereomicroscope, and the diameter of the root canal and the IAF at WL were assessed. RESULTS: Canals preflared with RaCe instruments had the lowest discrepancy between the apical root canal diameter and the IAF diameter (15.7 ± 9.7 µm) followed by ProTaper (22.2 ± 11.0 µm) and FlexMaster (35.0 ± 17.2 µm). CONCLUSIONS: Preflaring of root canals prevents underestimation of the actual apical root canal diameter. The type of instruments used for preflaring show differences on the accuracy of IAF determination. Preflaring with larger tapered instruments leads to a more accurate apical sizing, and this information is crucial concerning the appropriate final diameter for complete apical shaping.


Assuntos
Instrumentos Odontológicos , Cavidade Pulpar/anatomia & histologia , Preparo de Canal Radicular/instrumentação , Preparo de Canal Radicular/métodos , Ápice Dentário/anatomia & histologia , Ligas Dentárias , Desenho de Equipamento , Humanos , Mandíbula , Dente Molar , Níquel , Odontometria , Estatísticas não Paramétricas , Titânio
3.
J Endod ; 35(2): 261-4, 2009 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19166786

RESUMO

The objective of this study was to compare the quality of Guttaflow (Coltene/Whaledent, Langenau, Germany), Resilon/Epiphany (Jeneric/Pentron, Kusterdingen, Germany), and EndoREZ (Ultradent Products, Inc, South Jordan, UT) root canal fillings. Thirty single-rooted teeth were randomly assigned to three groups: Resilon/Epiphany, EndoREZ, and Guttaflow. After radiography of the root canal fillings, the roots were sectioned horizontally at the level of 2 mm and 4 mm from the apex. The area of voids and adaptation to canal walls and points were evaluated using light microscopy and calculated through a computer program. The radiographs showed no significant differences between the materials (p > 0.05, Mann-Whitney U test). Evaluation of cross-sections revealed sealer adaptation >99% to the root canals and >98% to the points. Resilon/Epiphany had significantly higher values at 98.8% (standard deviation [SD] = 3.9%) than EndoREZ at 98.7% (SD = 1.1%), and Guttaflow at 98.5 (SD = 2.1%) (p < 0.05, Mann-Whitney U test). The absolute difference compared with Resilon/Epiphany was at 0.84% (0.44%-1.76%) for EndoREZ and at 1.08% for Guttaflow (0.00%-2.08%) (95% confidence interval, Hodges-Lehman). This outcome indicated an effective apical obturation using any of the three materials in combination with a noncompaction technique.


Assuntos
Materiais Restauradores do Canal Radicular , Obturação do Canal Radicular/métodos , Ápice Dentário/diagnóstico por imagem , Resinas Compostas , Dimetilpolisiloxanos , Combinação de Medicamentos , Guta-Percha , Humanos , Teste de Materiais , Radiografia
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA