A comparison of sealer placement techniques in curved canals

Hall, Michael; Clement, David J.; Dove, S. Brent; Walker, W. Allan

doi:10.1016/s0099-2399(96)80055-0

Cited by 28 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A preferable method has not been described in the literature. 8,20,21 However, LS has been reported to be better than sonic files and K-files in the study by Kahn et al 7 In contrast, this study reported that EC was significantly better than EA in both analyses, and the percentage of sealer penetration by EC and EA were better than LS.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 78%

Effectiveness of different final irrigation techniques and placement of endodontic sealer into dentinal tubules

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to compare two irrigation techniques and four devices for endodontic sealer placement into the dentinal tubules. Ninety-nine single-rooted human teeth were instrumented and allocated to either the control (CO) (n=11) or experimental groups according to the irrigation method: syringe and NaveTip needle (NT) (n=44), and EndoActivator (EA) (n=44). These groups were subdivided according to sealer placement into K-File (KF), lentulo spiral (LS), Easy Clean (EC), and EndoActivator (EA) subgroups. Moreover, the distances of 5 mm and 2 mm from the apex were analyzed. The teeth were obturated with AH Plus and GuttaCore X3. Analyses were performed by scanning electron microscopy associated to cathodoluminescence. The percentage and maximum depth of sealer penetration were measured. Data were evaluated by three-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Games-Howell test (p<0.05). EA was superior to NT in percentage of sealer penetration. EC was significantly superior to EA (subgroup) for sealer penetration, and both improved the percentage of sealer penetration when compared to LS. Better sealer penetration was observed at the distance of 5 mm from the apex. Sealer penetration into the dentinal tubules was significantly improved by sonic irrigant activation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 78%

Effectiveness of different final irrigation techniques and placement of endodontic sealer into dentinal tubules

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…AH Plus (Dentsply Maillefer) was mixed according to the manufacturer's instructions and placed in the canal to 1 mm short of the working length by using a 400-rpm lentulo spiral (Dentsply Maillefer) for 5 seconds (23). In the passive technique group, main guttapercha cones of size 30 and taper 0.02 (Henry Schein, Mexico City, Mexico) were coated with sealer and placed into the root canal to the working length.…”

Section: Root Canal Fillingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Vertical Root Fractures and Dentin Defects: Effects of Root Canal Preparation, Filling, and Mechanical Cycling

Barreto

Moraes

Rosa

et al. 2012

Journal of Endodontics

109

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…5 It was theorized that the properties of ultrasonics may result in a more thorough coverage of dentinal walls by sealers. It was also reported that 1,2 Reader, 3,6 Assistant Professor, 4 Consultant, 5 Senior Lecturer 1,6 Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Bharti Vidyapeeth Deemed University Dental College and Hospital Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%