A random sample of non‐institutionalized people aged 65 years and over in Örebro County, Sweden, were examined radiographically. Periapical conditions and the prevalence and quality of root fillings were evaluated. Approximately every 10th tooth showed radiographic signs of apical periodontitis: more than 1 in 20 teeth not previously root‐filled and more than 1 in 4 root‐filled teeth. Only 28% of the subjects had no tooth with periapical destruction. In all, 18% of the teeth were root‐filled: 27% of maxillary teeth and 11% of mandibular teeth. Periapical destructions were less prevalent in people with many remaining teeth and among married people as compared to the rest of the population. Periapical destructions were more common in subjects from “rest of county” as compared to “densely‐populated areas”. Variations in treatment quality might be one explanation for this difference. The percentage of root fillings classified as “unacceptable” was high (69%).

A total of 44 roots with periradicular inflammation, induced by inoculation of Streptococcus faecalis, were treated endodontically. All root canals were prepared with K‐reamers using 0.5% solution of sodium hypochlorite for irrigation. Bacteriological specimens demonstrated growth in all teeth when the root‐canal fillings were made. In all, 22 roots were filled with gutta‐percha, 11 roots with a calcium hydroxide preparation (Cala‐sept®) and 11 roots with Calasept®+ Dionosil®, an iodinized radio‐graphic contrast medium. The addition of Dionosil® improved the possibility of evaluating the placement of the calcium hydroxide paste. Dressings with calcium hydroxide are recommended in the treatment of teeth with apical periodontitis.

No abstract

No abstract

The exposure of dental personnel to chloroform in root-filling procedures was evaluated. Four different root filling procedures were studied. In all the procedures studied, guttapercha was used as the root-filling material and chloroform or sealers containing chloroform were used. Ten teeth in each group were root-filled. In the first group, chloroform and 5% rosin in chloroform were administered in medical cups, in the second group chloroform and Kloroperka NO was administered in medical cups. In Group three a specially designed glass tube (S-endodip) was used for administration and in the fourth group specially selected plastic tubes were used. In the last two groups the sealers were chloroform and 5% rosin in chloroform. When medical cups were used the exposure reached levels close to the accepted limit values in Sweden, indicating that only one root filling per day can be performed without the dental team being unacceptably exposed. Using either the glass tube or the specially designed plastic tube, the exposure was significantly reduced for the dentist (p < 0.005) and for the nurse (p < 0.005). The mean exposure was 19.1 mg/m3 for the dentist and 11.6 mg/m3 for the nurse in the first experimental group. The mean values in the second group were 15.4 mg/m3 and 16.6 mg/m3 respectively. In the third group, the dentist was exposed to a mean of 4.4 mg/m3 and the nurse to 6.3 mg/m3. In the fourth group, the mean exposure was 2.2 mg/m3 and 3.4 mg/m3 respectively.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)