1028 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15548274)
1. 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]
2. Scanning electron microscopic evaluation of debris and smear layer remaining following use of ProTaper and Hero Shaper instruments in combination with NaOCl and EDTA irrigation.
Yang G; Wu H; Zheng Y; Zhang H; Li H; Zhou X
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2008 Oct; 106(4):e63-71. PubMed ID: 18701325
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. SEM evaluation of root canal debridement with Sonicare CanalBrush irrigation.
Salman MI; Baumann MA; Hellmich M; Roggendorf MJ; Termaat S
Int Endod J; 2010 May; 43(5):363-9. PubMed ID: 20518928
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. Appearance of the root canal walls after preparation with NiTi rotary instruments: a comparative SEM investigation.
Prati C; Foschi F; Nucci C; Montebugnoli L; Marchionni S
Clin Oral Investig; 2004 Jun; 8(2):102-10. PubMed ID: 14760541
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Effectiveness of three different retreatment techniques in canals filled with compacted gutta-percha or Thermafil: a scanning electron microscope study.
Pirani C; Pelliccioni GA; Marchionni S; Montebugnoli L; Piana G; Prati C
J Endod; 2009 Oct; 35(10):1433-40. PubMed ID: 19801246
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The effect of high-frequency electrical pulses on organic tissue in root canals.
Lendini M; Alemanno E; Migliaretti G; Berutti E
Int Endod J; 2005 Aug; 38(8):531-8. PubMed ID: 16011771
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. A comparative evaluation of cleaning efficacy (debris and smear layer removal) of hand and two NiTi rotary instrumentation systems (K3 and ProTaper): a SEM study.
Reddy KB; Dash S; Kallepalli S; Vallikanthan S; Chakrapani N; Kalepu V
J Contemp Dent Pract; 2013 Nov; 14(6):1028-35. PubMed ID: 24858745
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The effectiveness of different acid irrigating solutions in root canal cleaning after hand and rotary instrumentation.
Pérez-Heredia M; Ferrer-Luque CM; González-Rodríguez MP
J Endod; 2006 Oct; 32(10):993-7. PubMed ID: 16982281
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A scanning electron microscopic evaluation of root canal wall cleanliness after calcium hydroxide removal using three irrigation regimens.
Naaman A; Kaloustian H; Ounsi HF; Naaman-Bou Abboud N; Ricci C; Medioni E
J Contemp Dent Pract; 2007 Jan; 8(1):11-8. PubMed ID: 17211500
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. 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]
15. Comparison of root canal preparation with two rotary NiTi instruments: ProFile .04 and GT Rotary.
Rödig T; Hülsmann M; Kahlmeier C
Int Endod J; 2007 Jul; 40(7):553-62. PubMed ID: 17511784
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Comparison of the efficacy of Smear Clear with and without a canal brush in smear layer and debris removal from instrumented root canal using WaveOne versus ProTaper: a scanning electron microscopic study.
Kamel WH; Kataia EM
J Endod; 2014 Mar; 40(3):446-50. PubMed ID: 24565669
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. A comparative scanning electron microscopic investigation of the smear layer after the use of sodium hypochlorite gel and solution forms as root canal irrigants.
Zand V; Lotfi M; Rahimi S; Mokhtari H; Kazemi A; Sakhamanesh V
J Endod; 2010 Jul; 36(7):1234-7. PubMed ID: 20630306
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Effectiveness of two nickel-titanium rotary instruments and a hand file for removing gutta-percha in severely curved root canals during retreatment: an ex vivo study.
Gergi R; Sabbagh C
Int Endod J; 2007 Jul; 40(7):532-7. PubMed ID: 17511787
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Evaluation of ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) solution and gel for smear layer removal.
Dotto SR; Travassos RM; de Oliveira EP; Machado ME; Martins JL
Aust Endod J; 2007 Aug; 33(2):62-5. PubMed ID: 17697246
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
