936 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15910476)
1. Canal preparation with Hero 642 rotary Ni-Ti instruments compared with stainless steel hand K-file assessed using computed tomography.
Taşdemir T; Aydemir H; Inan U; Unal O
Int Endod J; 2005 Jun; 38(6):402-8. PubMed ID: 15910476
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Shaping ability of two rotary instruments in simulated canals: stainless steel ENDOflash and nickel-titanium HERO Shaper.
Perez F; Schoumacher M; Peli JF
Int Endod J; 2005 Sep; 38(9):637-44. PubMed ID: 16104977
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Shaping ability of Hero 642 rotary nickel-titanium instruments and stainless steel hand K-Flexofiles in simulated curved root canals.
Schäfer E
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2001 Aug; 92(2):215-20. PubMed ID: 11505270
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparative evaluation of the preparation efficacies of HERO Shaper and Nitiflex root canal instruments in curved root canals.
Kaptan F; Sert S; Kayahan B; Haznedaroğlu F; Tanalp J; Bayirli G
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2005 Nov; 100(5):636-42. PubMed ID: 16243253
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Analysis of Ni-Ti versus stainless steel instrumentation in resin simulated canals.
Coleman CL; Svec TA
J Endod; 1997 Apr; 23(4):232-5. PubMed ID: 9594772
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparison of root canal preparation using RaCe and ProTaper rotary Ni-Ti instruments.
Paqué F; Musch U; Hülsmann M
Int Endod J; 2005 Jan; 38(1):8-16. PubMed ID: 15606817
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. A reconstructed computerized tomographic comparison of Ni-Ti rotary GT files versus traditional instruments in canals shaped by novice operators.
Gluskin AH; Brown DC; Buchanan LS
Int Endod J; 2001 Sep; 34(6):476-84. PubMed ID: 11556516
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Root canal preparation with Endo-Eze AET: changes in root canal shape assessed by micro-computed tomography.
Paqué F; Barbakow F; Peters OA
Int Endod J; 2005 Jul; 38(7):456-64. PubMed ID: 15946266
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Comparison among manual instruments and PathFile and Mtwo rotary instruments to create a glide path in the root canal preparation of curved canals.
Alves Vde O; Bueno CE; Cunha RS; Pinheiro SL; Fontana CE; de Martin AS
J Endod; 2012 Jan; 38(1):117-20. PubMed ID: 22152634
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Shaping ability of progressive versus constant taper instruments in simulated root canals.
Yang GB; Zhou XD; Zhang H; Wu HK
Int Endod J; 2006 Oct; 39(10):791-9. PubMed ID: 16948665
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Evaluation of the root dentine cutting effectiveness of the HERO 642, HERO Apical and HERO Shaper rotary systems.
Câmara AC; Aguiar CM; de Figueiredo JA
Aust Endod J; 2008 Dec; 34(3):94-100. PubMed ID: 19032642
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A comparison of three Ni-Ti rotary instruments in apical transportation.
Javaheri HH; Javaheri GH
J Endod; 2007 Mar; 33(3):284-6. PubMed ID: 17320715
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. [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]
16. Effectiveness of HERO 642 versus Hedström files for removing gutta-percha fillings in curved root canals: an ex vivo study.
Aydin B; Köse T; Calişkan MK
Int Endod J; 2009 Nov; 42(11):1050-6. PubMed ID: 19825041
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparative investigation of two rotary nickel-titanium instruments: ProTaper versus RaCe. Part 2. Cleaning effectiveness and shaping ability in severely curved root canals of extracted teeth.
Schäfer E; Vlassis M
Int Endod J; 2004 Apr; 37(4):239-48. PubMed ID: 15056350
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Comparison between a hand stainless-steel K file and a rotary NiTi 0.04 taper.
Namazikhah MS; Mokhlis HR; Alasmakh K
J Calif Dent Assoc; 2000 Jun; 28(6):421-6. PubMed ID: 11324127
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Assessment of the deviation after biomechanical preparation of the coronal, middle, and apical thirds of root canals instrumented with three HERO rotary systems.
Câmara AC; Aguiar CM; Poli de Figueiredo JA
J Endod; 2007 Dec; 33(12):1460-3. PubMed ID: 18037059
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
