These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
293 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 14600698)
1. Evaluation of canal cleanliness and smear layer removal after the use of the Quantec-E irrigation system and syringe: a comparative scanning electron microscope study. Setlock J; Fayad MI; BeGole E; Bruzick M Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2003 Nov; 96(5):614-7. PubMed ID: 14600698 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Effectiveness of oxidative potential water as a root canal irrigant. Hata G; Hayami S; Weine FS; Toda T Int Endod J; 2001 Jun; 34(4):308-17. PubMed ID: 11482143 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Effectiveness of ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) and MTAD on debris and smear layer removal using a self-adjusting file. Adigüzel O; Yiğit-Özer S; Kaya S; Uysal İ; Ganidağli-Ayaz S; Akkuş Z Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2011 Dec; 112(6):803-8. PubMed ID: 21873086 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Root canal debris removal using different irrigating needles: an SEM study. Ghivari S; Kubasad G Indian J Dent Res; 2011; 22(5):659-63. PubMed ID: 22406709 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The self-adjusting file (SAF). Part 3: removal of debris and smear layer-A scanning electron microscope study. Metzger Z; Teperovich E; Cohen R; Zary R; Paqué F; Hülsmann M J Endod; 2010 Apr; 36(4):697-702. PubMed ID: 20307746 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Effectiveness of different final irrigant activation protocols on smear layer removal in curved canals. Caron G; Nham K; Bronnec F; Machtou P J Endod; 2010 Aug; 36(8):1361-6. PubMed ID: 20647097 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The effect of application time of EDTA and NaOCl on intracanal smear layer removal: an SEM analysis. Teixeira CS; Felippe MC; Felippe WT Int Endod J; 2005 May; 38(5):285-90. PubMed ID: 15876291 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Evaluation of radicular dentin erosion and smear layer removal capacity of Self-Adjusting File using different concentrations of sodium hypochlorite as an initial irrigant. Kaya S; Yiğit-Özer S; Adigüzel Ö Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2011 Oct; 112(4):524-30. PubMed ID: 21664155 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. A comparative study of the removal of smear layer by three endodontic irrigants and two types of laser. Takeda FH; Harashima T; Kimura Y; Matsumoto K Int Endod J; 1999 Jan; 32(1):32-9. PubMed ID: 10356467 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Comparison of the EndoVac system and conventional needle irrigation on removal of the smear layer in primary molar root canals. Buldur B; Kapdan A Niger J Clin Pract; 2017 Sep; 20(9):1168-1174. PubMed ID: 29072242 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A scanning electron microscopic study of debris and smear layer remaining following use of GT rotary instruments. Gambarini G; Laszkiewicz J Int Endod J; 2002 May; 35(5):422-7. PubMed ID: 12059912 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Cleaning effectiveness of root canal irrigation with electrochemically activated anolyte and catholyte solutions: a pilot study. Solovyeva AM; Dummer PM Int Endod J; 2000 Nov; 33(6):494-504. PubMed ID: 11307252 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Influence of size and taper of basic root canal preparation on root canal cleanliness: a scanning electron microscopy study. Plotino G; Özyürek T; Grande NM; Gündoğar M Int Endod J; 2019 Mar; 52(3):343-351. PubMed ID: 30129186 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Light and scanning electron microscopic evaluation of Glyde File Prep in smear layer removal. Lim TS; Wee TY; Choi MY; Koh WC; Sae-Lim V Int Endod J; 2003 May; 36(5):336-43. PubMed ID: 12752647 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Efficacy of four different irrigation techniques combined with 60 °C 3% sodium hypochlorite and 17% EDTA in smear layer removal. Guo X; Miao H; Li L; Zhang S; Zhou D; Lu Y; Wu L BMC Oral Health; 2014 Sep; 14():114. PubMed ID: 25201549 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Evaluation of smear layer removal by EDTAC and sodium hypochlorite with ultrasonic agitation. Guerisoli DM; Marchesan MA; Walmsley AD; Lumley PJ; Pecora JD Int Endod J; 2002 May; 35(5):418-21. PubMed ID: 12059911 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. A quantitative and qualitative analysis of ultrasonic versus sonic endodontic systems on canal cleanliness and obturation. Kanter V; Weldon E; Nair U; Varella C; Kanter K; Anusavice K; Pileggi R Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2011 Dec; 112(6):809-13. PubMed ID: 21906970 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Smear layer removal and canal cleanliness using different irrigation systems (EndoActivator, EndoVac, and passive ultrasonic irrigation): field emission scanning electron microscopic evaluation in an in vitro study. Mancini M; Cerroni L; Iorio L; Armellin E; Conte G; Cianconi L J Endod; 2013 Nov; 39(11):1456-60. PubMed ID: 24139274 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Comparison of the efficacy of maleic acid and ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid in smear layer removal from instrumented human root canal: a scanning electron microscopic study. Ballal NV; Kandian S; Mala K; Bhat KS; Acharya S J Endod; 2009 Nov; 35(11):1573-6. PubMed ID: 19840650 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Effect of passive ultrasonic irrigation and manual dynamic irrigation on smear layer removal from root canals in a closed apex in vitro model. Andrabi SM; Kumar A; Zia A; Iftekhar H; Alam S; Siddiqui S J Investig Clin Dent; 2014 Aug; 5(3):188-93. PubMed ID: 23595996 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]