1973
DOI: 10.1016/0030-4220(73)90338-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Biologic effects of dental materials

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

1
40
0
4

Year Published

1985
1985
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 298 publications
(45 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
1
40
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…In spite of its unpleasant taste, toxicity, and inability to completely remove the smear layer, NaOCl remains the recommended irrigant of choice. [8]…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In spite of its unpleasant taste, toxicity, and inability to completely remove the smear layer, NaOCl remains the recommended irrigant of choice. [8]…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…NaOCl would appear as the best available canal irrigant because of its antibacterial and organic tissue-dissolving properties,[1920] but it is not possible to remove the smear layer with NaOCl. [17182122] Nevertheless, considering the major objective of the present investigation (to compare the cleaning effectiveness of three instrumentation technique under identical conditions), a combined irrigation was used.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, it is not only irritant to the periapical tissues,[8] but also inherently possesses certain disadvantages such as staining of instruments, burning of surrounding tissues,[2] unpleasant taste, high toxicity, corrosive to instruments,[9] inability to remove the smear layer, reduction in elastic modulus and flexural strength of dentin. [10]…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%