Technical quality of root canal treatment in Taiwan.

AIM: To evaluate the current technical quality of root canal treatment (RCT) in Taiwan. METHODOLOGY: A total of 1085 RCT cases, randomly selected from a large sample and representative of the Taiwanese population from April to September 2000, were evaluated by eight endodontic specialists. The qualitative evaluation of RCT cases was based on two variables: length of the root filling and density of the obturation. A root canal with both adequate filling length (the apical termination of the root filling within 2 mm of the radiographic apex) and complete obturation (no lateral or apical canal lumen visible in the apical one-third of the root canal) was defined as having good-quality endodontic work (GQEW). A tooth was defined as having a GQEW when all its canals were categorized as GQEW. RESULTS: From a total of 1867 root canals, overfilling occurred in 235 (12.6%), adequate filling length in 1152 (61.7%), underfilling in 466 (25.0%) and no filling in 12 (0.6%). Of the 1867 root canals, 710 (38.0%) demonstrated complete obturation and 1157 (62%) demonstrated incomplete obturation. GQEW was found in 650 (34.8%) root canals and 329 (30.3%) teeth. The percentage of teeth with GQEW in hospital cases (38.1%) was significantly greater (P < 0.001) than that in private clinic cases (24.3%). In addition, the frequency of teeth with GQEW in the anterior teeth (40.4%) or in the premolars (33%) was significantly greater (P < 0.001) than that in the molars (18.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Approximately 70% of the teeth receiving RCT in Taiwan were either of inadequate filling length or sealing density.

An accident with a Gates Glidden drill in endodontic practice.

An unusual accident in clinical endodontic practice is described. The Gates Glidden drill is currently being used for establishing straight-line access in endodontic practice (1). One potential hazard in using the Gates Glidden drill is that it can separate within the canal (2). This article reports an accident involving a Gates Glidden drill separating in the elbow of a dentist during endodontic practice and to discuss the safety of using a Gates Glidden drill.

Microleakage between endodontic temporary restorative materials placed at different times.

Occlusal endodontic access preparations are occasionally made in teeth without removing the original restoration. However, microleakage between restorative materials that are placed at different times has not been extensively studied. Therefore, our objective was to compare microleakage at three areas: between an access opening restorative material and the cavity wall; between an additional material placed later to patch a secondary opening in the first restorative material and the original restorative material itself; and between the secondarily placed material and the cavity wall. Standard endodontic access preparations were made in 120 noncarious, nonrestored crowns of extracted human molars. These teeth were divided into six experimental groups. Another four molars were controls. The endodontic access cavities were restored with either IRM or amalgam as the primary restorative material. After 14 days, half of the primary restorations was removed, and this defect was filled with a secondary restorative material: IRM, Caviton, or a double seal of Caviton and IRM. Microleakage was measured linearly as the extent of basic fuchsin dye penetration under a stereomicroscope after thermal cycling (5 degrees and 55 degrees C for 100 cycles) and tooth sectioning. Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used for statistical analysis. Results indicated significantly less microleakage between primary and secondary restorative materials placed at different times than microleakage between primary temporary restorative materials and the access cavity wall, regardless of the type of primary restorative material used (IRM or amalgam).