Volume 8, Issue 3 (lasers in medicine 2011)
lmj 2011, 8(3): 28-33 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Morphological Changes Of Human Intracanal Dentin After Nd:YAG laser Irradiation, Ultrasonic and Conventional Methods: SEM Evaluation. lmj 2011; 8 (3) :28-33
URL: http://icml.ir/article-1-233-en.html
URL: http://icml.ir/article-1-233-en.html
Abstract: (8374 Views)
Background: Chemo mechanical debridement is an important part of endodontic treatment. Elimination of pulpal tissue, microbiota and their by-products, organic and inorganic debris removal by using instruments and intracanal irrigants are objectives of this important phase of treatment. The aim of this study was to ex-vivo evaluation of smear layer removal in conventional clinical methods, Passive Ultrasonic Irrigation, Laser Activated Irrigation.
Material and Methods: 54 anterior mandibular teeth was used in this study. After preparation of samples, they were divided in to 3 groups of Conventional Irrigation +Smear layer removal, Passive Ultrasonic Irrigation, Laser Activated Irrigation. Then, the samples were cut longitudinally in mesiodistal direction for examination by SEM (1500X) for assessing smear layer removal.
Results: In coronal, middle and apical one third, the best result was obtained from Conventional Irrigation + Smear layer removal group for smear layer removal.
Conclusion: According to better smear layer removal in Conventional Irrigation + Smear layer, it is considered as gold standard protocol and other groups cannot be a suitable substitution for this method.
Material and Methods: 54 anterior mandibular teeth was used in this study. After preparation of samples, they were divided in to 3 groups of Conventional Irrigation +Smear layer removal, Passive Ultrasonic Irrigation, Laser Activated Irrigation. Then, the samples were cut longitudinally in mesiodistal direction for examination by SEM (1500X) for assessing smear layer removal.
Results: In coronal, middle and apical one third, the best result was obtained from Conventional Irrigation + Smear layer removal group for smear layer removal.
Conclusion: According to better smear layer removal in Conventional Irrigation + Smear layer, it is considered as gold standard protocol and other groups cannot be a suitable substitution for this method.
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
