2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2015.06.005
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Infection Control in Retreatment Cases: In Vivo Antibacterial Effects of 2 Instrumentation Systems

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

2
22
0
17

Year Published

2016
2016
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 47 publications
(41 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
2
22
0
17
Order By: Relevance
“…Therefore, the second null hypothesis was accepted. Although no previous studies have evaluated the reduction/elimination of bacterial by-products by the SAF system, a recent study did not reveal superior results for SAF when compared with conventional rotary instruments in reducing intracanal bacterial counts (Rodrigues et al 2015). According to these authors, the lack of improved effects for the SAF system could be explained by the use of single-rooted and singlecanaled teeth which, from a clinical perspective, are teeth that did not have significant anatomic variations.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, the second null hypothesis was accepted. Although no previous studies have evaluated the reduction/elimination of bacterial by-products by the SAF system, a recent study did not reveal superior results for SAF when compared with conventional rotary instruments in reducing intracanal bacterial counts (Rodrigues et al 2015). According to these authors, the lack of improved effects for the SAF system could be explained by the use of single-rooted and singlecanaled teeth which, from a clinical perspective, are teeth that did not have significant anatomic variations.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This technique may reveal bacteriological conditions only in the main root canal as absorbent paper points do not reach microorganisms located in isthmuses, dentinal tubules, lateral canals and apical ramifications. Bacteria can pass unnoticed by the paper point sampling approach (39). The sampling collection method using paper points might not able to obtain samples that can really represent the bacterial population of the root canal system of infected teeth, which is crucial for the improvement of the treatment protocols (40)(41)(42)(43)(44).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…119,120,121,122 Clinical trials reported no significant supplementary antibacterial effects of PUI. 123,124 Moreover, an outcome study found no superior results for treatment using PUI. 125 Clinical studies on the antibacterial benefits of a final rinse with CHX have also shown inconclusive results.…”
Section: Future Challenge -Reducing Unprepared Areas And/or Improvingmentioning
confidence: 99%