255 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 14977309)
1. Influence of instrument size on root canal debridement.
Usman N; Baumgartner JC; Marshall JG
J Endod; 2004 Feb; 30(2):110-2. PubMed ID: 14977309
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. [In vitro comparison of root canal preparation with step-back technique and GT rotary file--a nickel-titanium engine driven rotary instrument system].
Krajczár K; Tóth V; Nyárády Z; Szabó G
Fogorv Sz; 2005 Jun; 98(3):119-23. PubMed ID: 16108416
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Instrument separation analysis of multi-used ProTaper Universal rotary system during root canal therapy.
Wu J; Lei G; Yan M; Yu Y; Yu J; Zhang G
J Endod; 2011 Jun; 37(6):758-63. PubMed ID: 21787484
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Debris remaining in the apical third of root canals after chemomechanical preparation by using sodium hypochlorite and glyde: an in vivo study.
Cruz A; Vera J; Gascón G; Palafox-Sánchez CA; Amezcua O; Mercado G
J Endod; 2014 Sep; 40(9):1419-23. PubMed ID: 25146024
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The quality of apical canal preparation using hand and rotary instruments with specific criteria for enlargement based on initial apical file size.
Tan BT; Messer HH
J Endod; 2002 Sep; 28(9):658-64. PubMed ID: 12236311
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Comparative study of root-canal preparation using Lightspeed and Quantec SC rotary NiTi instruments.
Hülsmann M; Herbst U; Schäfers F
Int Endod J; 2003 Nov; 36(11):748-56. PubMed ID: 14641438
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Evaluation of the centreing ability of the ProTaper Universal rotary system in curved roots in comparison to Nitiflex files.
Aguiar CM; de Andrade Mendes D; Câmara AC; de Figueiredo JA
Aust Endod J; 2009 Dec; 35(3):174-9. PubMed ID: 19961458
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The efficacy of ultrasonic irrigation to remove artificially placed dentine debris from human root canals prepared using instruments of varying taper.
van der Sluis LW; Wu MK; Wesselink PR
Int Endod J; 2005 Oct; 38(10):764-8. PubMed ID: 16164691
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Influence of root canal taper on its cleanliness: a scanning electron microscopic study.
Arvaniti IS; Khabbaz MG
J Endod; 2011 Jun; 37(6):871-4. PubMed ID: 21787508
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The effectiveness of increased apical enlargement in reducing intracanal bacteria.
Card SJ; Sigurdsson A; Orstavik D; Trope M
J Endod; 2002 Nov; 28(11):779-83. PubMed ID: 12470024
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. SEM evaluation of canal wall dentine following use of Mtwo and ProTaper NiTi rotary instruments.
Foschi F; Nucci C; Montebugnoli L; Marchionni S; Breschi L; Malagnino VA; Prati C
Int Endod J; 2004 Dec; 37(12):832-9. PubMed ID: 15548274
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Ultrastructural morphologic evaluation of root canal walls prepared by two rotary nickel-titanium systems: a comparative study.
Sabet NE; Lutfy RA
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2008 Sep; 106(3):e59-66. PubMed ID: 18602300
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Influence of the NiTi rotary system on the debridement quality of the root canal space.
De-Deus G; Garcia-Filho P
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2009 Oct; 108(4):e71-6. PubMed ID: 19778736
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Current concepts for preparing the root canal system.
Ruddle CJ
Dent Today; 2001 Feb; 20(2):76-83. PubMed ID: 12524850
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Evaluation of apical debris removal using various sizes and tapers of ProFile GT files.
Albrecht LJ; Baumgartner JC; Marshall JG
J Endod; 2004 Jun; 30(6):425-8. PubMed ID: 15167472
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Comparison of a continuous ultrasonic irrigation device and conventional needle irrigation in the removal of root canal debris.
Curtis TO; Sedgley CM
J Endod; 2012 Sep; 38(9):1261-4. PubMed ID: 22892747
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. A comparative study of root canal preparation with NiTi-TEE and K3 rotary Ni-Ti instruments.
Jodway B; Hülsmann M
Int Endod J; 2006 Jan; 39(1):71-80. PubMed ID: 16409331
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Influence of cervical preflaring on apical file size determination.
Pecora JD; Capelli A; Guerisoli DM; Spanó JC; Estrela C
Int Endod J; 2005 Jul; 38(7):430-5. PubMed ID: 15946262
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Evaluation of Glyde File Prep in combination with sodium hypochlorite as a root canal irrigant.
Grandini S; Balleri P; Ferrari M
J Endod; 2002 Apr; 28(4):300-3. PubMed ID: 12043868
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A comparison of instrument-centering ability within the root canal for three contemporary instrumentation techniques.
Song YL; Bian Z; Fan B; Fan MW; Gutmann JL; Peng B
Int Endod J; 2004 Apr; 37(4):265-71. PubMed ID: 15056353
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
