Is a mix - A fix? "A microscopic analysis of depth of penetration of three combinations of irrigants".

Aims: The aim of the study is to evaluate the penetration depth of irrigants mixed with NaOCl into dentinal tubules at the apical third of the root canal using a confocal laser scanning microscope (CLSM). Materials and Methods: Thirty-six single-rooted teeth were selected, decoronated, and straight-line access established. Then, the canal was enlarged with hand Protaper till size F3. The samples were divided randomly into three groups: Group 1 was irrigated with 3% NaOCl mixed with 1% phytic acid; Group 2 was irrigated with 3% NaOCl mixed with 18% etidronic acid; and Group 3 was irrigated with 3% NaOCl mixed with chitosan. The samples were subjected to CLSM evaluation. One-way analysis of variance with Tukey's post hoc was used for statistical analysis. Results: Group 3 (NaOCl with chitosan) showed a greater depth of penetration in comparison to Groups 1 and 2. Conclusion: Within limitations, it can be concluded that chitosan, in combination with NaOCl can be used as an alternative to the current irrigation protocol.

An in vitro comparison of alterations in surface topographies of three different rotary files after root canal preparation with different irrigating solutions: Atomic force microscopic study.

Objectives: The objective of the study was to evaluate and compare the surface topographies of WaveOne Gold (WOG), FlexiCON X1, and EdgeOne Fire (EOF) reciprocating files before and after root canal instrumentation using different irrigating solutions. Materials and Methods: Forty-eight extracted mandibular molars were selected and randomly assigned into three groups (n = 16) based on the file system used and each group was divided into two subgroups based on the irrigants used during root canal treatment. (Group-1: WOG; Group-2: FlexiCON X1; Group-3: EOF; Subgroup-A: 3% sodium hypochlorite [NaOCl] +17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid [EDTA]; Subgroup-B: Citra wash as irrigating solutions). The surface topography of the files was analyzed using atomic force microscope before and after instrumentation. Average roughness and root mean square roughness were calculated. Independent and paired t-tests and one-way analysis of variance with Tukey's post hoc were used for statistical analysis. Results: Atomic force microscopy results showed an increase in surface roughness after instrumentation, EOF showing the highest roughness. Citra wash showed more roughness compared to NaOCl and EDTA together. However, the surface roughness between the experimental groups WOG and EOF are statistically insignificant and this insignificance was also seen among subgroups (P>0.05). Conclusion: Instrumentation with various irrigating solutions affected the surface topography of EOF, WOG, and FlexiCON X1 reciprocating files.

Evaluation of pain in single and multi rooted teeth treated in single visit endodontic therapy.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of post-operative pain was compared following single-visit canal treatment in single- and multi-rooted teeth, with and without periapical radiolucency. The article also reviews the issues of postoperative pain and healing, following single-visit and multi-visit endodontic therapy. Single-visit endodontic therapy (SVE) was performed in 50 single-rooted teeth and 60 multiple-rooted teeth. MATERIALS & METHODS: Single-visit endodontic therapy (SVE) was performed in 50 single-rooted teeth and 60 multiple-rooted teeth. The subjects were divided as follows: Group I -Single-rooted teeth with periapical radiolucency (n=25); Group II-Single-rooted teeth without periapical radiolucency (n=25); Group III-Multiple-rooted teeth with periapical radiolucency (n=30); and Group IV-Multiple-rooted teeth without periapical radiolucency (n=30). Assessment of postoperative pain was done at 24hrs, 3 days and 1 week using a self report questionnaire. The data was analyzed using non-parametric Kruskal -Wallis test. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was observed in postoperative pain following SVE between the single-rooted and multiple-rooted teeth groups at 24hrs, 3 days and 1 week. The presence or absence of periapical radiolucency had no significant influence on the incidence of reported postoperative pain following SVE. CONCLUSION: There was no difference in incidence of pain in single rooted teeth and multi-rooted teeth with and without periapical radiolucencies following SVE. Thus, incidence of post-operative pain does not seem to be a valid comparison criterion between single- and multiple-visit endodontic therapies. Also, the literature suggests similar success rates with single-visit and multiple-visit root canal treatment. How to cite the article: Raju TB, Seshadri A, Vamsipavani B, Abhilash K, Subhash AV, Kumari KV. Evaluation of Pain in Single and Multi Rooted Teeth Treated in Single Visit Endodontic Therapy. J Int Oral Health 2014;6(1):27-32.

Sterilizing Endodontic Files by four different sterilization methods to prevent cross-infection - An In-vitro Study.

BACKGROUND: Aim of the study was to compare 4 different methods of sterilizing endodontic files in dental practice. MATERIALS & METHODS: The present study was performed on 100 K-files, 21 mm long and of size 25. Of these, 20 files were taken as control group, and the remaining 80 files were divided into 4 groups of 20 files each and they were tested for the efficacy of sterilization with different methods: Autoclave, glass bead, glutaraldehyde and CO2 laser. RESULTS: The study showed that the files sterilized by autoclave and lasers were completely sterile. Those sterilized by glass bead were 90% sterile and those with glutaraldehyde were 80% sterile. CONCLUSION: The study concluded that autoclave or laser could be used as a method of sterilization in clinical practice and in advanced clinics; laser can be used also as a chair side method of sterilization. How to cite this article: Raju TB, Garapati S, Agrawal R, Reddy S, Razdan A, Kumar SK. Sterilizing Endodontic Files by four different sterilization methods to prevent cross-infection - An In-vitro Study. J Int Oral Health 2013; 5(6):108-12 .