Aim and Objectives:Successful root canal treatment involves the complete elimination of microorganism from the root canal and the three-dimensional obturation of the canal space. Enterococcus faecalis is the most commonly found bacteria in failed root canal. Chemical irrigation of canals along with biomechanical preparation helps in the elimination of microorganisms. The present study was aimed to evaluate the antimicrobial effect of herbal root canal irrigants (Morinda citrifolia, Azadirachta indica extract, Aloe vera) with sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl).Materials and Methods:The bacterial E. faecalis (ATCC) culture was grown overnight in brain heart infusion (BHI) broth and inoculated in Mueller–Hinton agar plates. Antibacterial inhibition was assessed using agar well diffusion method. All five study irrigants were added to respective wells in agar plates and incubated at 37°C for 24 h. Bacterial inhibition zone around each well was recorded. Results were tabulated and statistically analyzed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences software for Windows, version 19.0. (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY.Results:Highest inhibitory zone against E. faecalis was seen in NaOCl fallowed by M. citrifolia and A. indica extract, and the least by A. vera extract.Conclusion:Tested herbal medicine (A. indica extract, M. citrifolia, A. vera) showed inhibitory zone against E. faecalis. Hence, these irrigants can be used as root canal irrigating solutions.

No abstract

Introduction: The purpose of the present study was to compare the buckling resistance between the hand files and rotary files and compare the buckling resistance between pathfinding files made out of different alloys. Materials and Method: The test instruments were divided into two major groups based on the mode of use, hand instruments and rotary instruments. These groups were further divided into six subgroups. Six subgroups of endodontic files containing three samples were tested for buckling resistance by applying load in axial direction using a universal testing machine. The maximum load required to generate a lateral elastic displacement of 1 mm was recorded for each instrument. Data were analyzed using two-way analysis of variance and Newman–Keuls multiple post hoc tests using software SPSS version 19. P value was considered < 0.05. Results: The results indicated that the buckling resistance decreased in the following order: Hand C Plus file > Rotary One G file > Hand C pilot files > Rotary ProGlider file > Hand PathFinder Carbon Steel > Rotary HyFlex Electric Discharge Machining (EDM) file. Conclusion: The stainless steel instruments (C + and C-Pilot) were more resistant to buckling than carbon steel (Pathfinder CS) and nickel-titanium instruments (ProGlider and HyFlex EDM). Buckling resistance may influence instrument's performance during the negotiation of constricted canals, and the C Plus in hand file group showed significantly better results than the other instruments tested. Metallurgy and modulus of elasticity of the instruments play a significant role in buckling resistance as One G file in rotary file group showed highest buckling resistance (conventional austenite nickel-titanium) than ProGlider (M-wire NiTi) and HyFlex (EDM + Controlled Memory).

Background: Selection of instruments is important to prevent any complications such as ledge formation and instrument breakage. The main drawback linked with instrumentation is smear layer formation. Objectives: This study was done for comparison of manual hand file, rotary ProTaper Ni-Ti, erbium:yttrium–aluminum–garnet (Er:YAG) laser, ultrasound, and CanalBrush (CB) methods for smear layer removal. Methodology: Sixty freshly extracted single-rooted mandibular first premolars extracted for orthodontic treatment purpose were selected and classified into six groups. Group I was negative control in which no final agitation of irrigant was performed. In Group II, solution activation was performed with ProTaper Universal System, in Group III, solution activation was done with canal brush, in Group IV, ultrasound activation was done, in Group V, solution agitation was performed with Er:YAG laser agitation, and in Group VI, canal preparation with hand files was performed. Smear layer score was evaluated after canal preparation with each method. Results: Score 1 was seen in 3 (30%) in Group IV and 6 (60%) in Group V, score 2 was seen in 3 (30%) in Group I, 8 (80%) in Group II, 7 (70%) in Group III, 5 (50%) in Group IV, 3 (30%) in Group V, and 4 (40%) in Group VI. Score 3 was observed in 7 (70%) in Group I, 2 (20%) in Group II, 3 (70%) in Group III, 2 (20%) in Group IV, 1 (10%) in Group V, and 6 (60%) in Group VI. A statistically significant difference was found in smear layer removal score in all groups ( P < 0.05) except between Group I versus VI ( P > 0.05). Conclusion: Complete removal of the smear layer was not observed in any of the methods used in the study; however, Er: YAG laser was found to be better as compared to other methods.

No abstract