Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 1 de 1
Filtrar
Mais filtros








Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Niger J Clin Pract ; 23(9): 1237-1242, 2020 Sep.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32913162

RESUMO

AIMS: We evaluated and compared EndoActivator, CanalBrush, and passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI) in the removal of calcium hydroxide and calcium hydroxide with iodoform and p-chlorophenol paste (Calcipast Forte) from artificial standardized grooves in the apical third of root canals. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 34 mandibular premolars were prepared and then split longitudinally. A standardized groove was prepared in the apical part of both segments. The grooves were filled with either calcium hydroxide or Calcipast Forte, and the segments were reassembled. CanalBrush, EndoActivator, or PUI were used. The amount of remaining medicament was evaluated using a four-grade scoring system. RESULTS: None of the irrigation methods could completely remove the pastes from the grooves. More Calcipast Forte paste was detected compared with calcium hydroxide (P < 0.01). PUI was the least effective method in removing Calcipast Forte. CONCLUSIONS: It was more difficult to remove Calcipast Forte than a water-based calcium hydroxide paste.


Assuntos
Hidróxido de Cálcio/química , Clorofenóis , Cavidade Pulpar/patologia , Hidrocarbonetos Iodados , Materiais Restauradores do Canal Radicular/química , Irrigantes do Canal Radicular/administração & dosagem , Terapia por Ultrassom/métodos , Humanos , Irrigantes do Canal Radicular/química , Preparo de Canal Radicular/instrumentação , Preparo de Canal Radicular/métodos , Irrigação Terapêutica/métodos , Terapia por Ultrassom/instrumentação , Ultrassom , Água
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA