مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

video

مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

sound

مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

Persian Version

مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

View:

269
مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

Download:

131
مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

Cites:

Information Journal Paper

Title

IN VITRO COMPARISON OF GUTTA-PERCHA REMOVAL WITH H-FILE AND PROTAPER WITH OR WITHOUT CHLOROFORM

Pages

  6-9

Abstract

 Introduction: Removal of root filling materials is one of the key steps in success of root canal RETREATMENT. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of H-FILE and ProTaper with or without CHLOROFORM in the removal of GUTTA-PERCHA during RETREATMENT of mandibular premolars. Materials and Methods: Sixty mandibular premolars with one canal, and curvatures less than 30 degrees were used in this experimental study. They were instrumented with K-files and laterally obturated with condensed GUTTA-PERCHA using AH26 as the sealer and were stored in 100% humidity at 37oC for 2 weeks. The teeth were randomly divided into four groups of 15 teeth each. Removal of GUTTA-PERCHA was performed with H-FILE and ProTaper. All techniques were used with or without CHLOROFORM. The teeth were split longitudinally and the area of remaining GUTTA-PERCHA/sealer on the root canal wall was explored under stereomicroscope. RETREATMENT time duration was also recorded for each sample. Data were analyzed statistically by Two-way ANOVA, t-test and Tukey’s.Results: In all groups, no significant difference was found in remaining GUTTA-PERCHA and sealer with or without using CHLOROFORM, but CHLOROFORM shortened the time of RETREATMENT. ProTaper left significantly less remaining filling materials than H-FILE (P<0.05). RETREATMENT time was significantly different between the studied groups (P<0.001).Conclusion: ProTaper Ni-Ti instruments proved to be more efficient and time-saving devices for removal of GUTTA-PERCHA compared to H-FILE in canals with no or slight curvature.

Cites

  • No record.

    • References

  • No record.

    • Cite

    APA: Copy

    KHALILAK, ZOHREH, VATANPOUR, MEHDI, DADRESANFAR, BAHAREH, MOSHKELGOSHA, POUNEH, & NOURBAKHSH, HAMIDREZA. (2013). IN VITRO COMPARISON OF GUTTA-PERCHA REMOVAL WITH H-FILE AND PROTAPER WITH OR WITHOUT CHLOROFORM. IRANIAN ENDODONTIC JOURNAL (IEJ), 8(1), 6-9. SID. https://sid.ir/paper/302872/en

    Vancouver: Copy

    KHALILAK ZOHREH, VATANPOUR MEHDI, DADRESANFAR BAHAREH, MOSHKELGOSHA POUNEH, NOURBAKHSH HAMIDREZA. IN VITRO COMPARISON OF GUTTA-PERCHA REMOVAL WITH H-FILE AND PROTAPER WITH OR WITHOUT CHLOROFORM. IRANIAN ENDODONTIC JOURNAL (IEJ)[Internet]. 2013;8(1):6-9. Available from: https://sid.ir/paper/302872/en

    IEEE: Copy

    ZOHREH KHALILAK, MEHDI VATANPOUR, BAHAREH DADRESANFAR, POUNEH MOSHKELGOSHA, and HAMIDREZA NOURBAKHSH, “IN VITRO COMPARISON OF GUTTA-PERCHA REMOVAL WITH H-FILE AND PROTAPER WITH OR WITHOUT CHLOROFORM,” IRANIAN ENDODONTIC JOURNAL (IEJ), vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 6–9, 2013, [Online]. Available: https://sid.ir/paper/302872/en

    Related Journal Papers

  • No record.

    • Related Seminar Papers

  • No record.

    • Related Plans

  • No record.

    • Recommended Workshops






    Move to top
    telegram sharing button
    whatsapp sharing button
    linkedin sharing button
    twitter sharing button
    email sharing button
    email sharing button
    email sharing button
    sharethis sharing button