1155 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16409331)
21. 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]
22. 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]
23. Efficacy of rotary instruments with greater taper in preparing oval root canals.
Elayouti A; Chu AL; Kimionis I; Klein C; Weiger R; Löst C
Int Endod J; 2008 Dec; 41(12):1088-92. PubMed ID: 19133098
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. [Cleanliness of the root canal walls after preparation with Mtwo rotary nickel-titanium instruments: a SEM study].
Lichota D; Nowicka A; Woźniak K; Lipski M
Ann Acad Med Stetin; 2008; 54(3):58-62. PubMed ID: 19839513
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. 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]
26. [Comparative study of hand-held nickel-titanium dental instruments based on the shape of the prepared root canal].
Szabó J; Serbán T; Nagy G; Madléna M; Ipolyi T
Fogorv Sz; 2003 Dec; 96(6):273-6. PubMed ID: 14971265
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. 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]
28. Debris retention and wear in three different nickel-titanium rotary instruments.
Elmsallati EA; Wadachi R; Ebrahim AK; Suda H
Aust Endod J; 2006 Dec; 32(3):107-11. PubMed ID: 17201751
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Shaping ability of Lightspeed rotary nickel-titanium instruments in simulated root canals. Part 1.
Thompson SA; Dummer PM
J Endod; 1997 Nov; 23(11):698-702. PubMed ID: 9587312
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. 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]
31. 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]
32. [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]
33. Comparative study on the shaping ability and cleaning efficiency of rotary Mtwo instruments. Part 2. Cleaning effectiveness and shaping ability in severely curved root canals of extracted teeth.
Schäfer E; Erler M; Dammaschke T
Int Endod J; 2006 Mar; 39(3):203-12. PubMed ID: 16507074
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. 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]
35. 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]
36. [The effect of instrumentation on original apical foramen shape using steel vs niti rotatory: computerized analysis].
Gallina G; Cumbo E; Gallo P; Pizzo G; D'Angelo M
Minerva Stomatol; 2002; 51(1-2):1-10. PubMed ID: 11845115
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Shaping ability and cleaning effectiveness of two single-file systems in severely curved root canals of extracted teeth: Reciproc and WaveOne versus Mtwo and ProTaper.
Bürklein S; Hinschitza K; Dammaschke T; Schäfer E
Int Endod J; 2012 May; 45(5):449-61. PubMed ID: 22188401
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Influence of shaft design on the shaping ability of 3 nickel-titanium rotary systems by means of spiral computerized tomography.
Versiani MA; Pascon EA; de Sousa CJ; Borges MA; Sousa-Neto MD
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2008 Jun; 105(6):807-13. PubMed ID: 18424117
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. A comparison of the shaping effects of 5 nickel-titanium rotary instruments in simulated S-shaped canals.
Ersev H; Yilmaz B; Ciftçioğlu E; Ozkarsli SF
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2010 May; 109(5):e86-93. PubMed ID: 20416526
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Comparative investigation of 2 rotary nickel-titanium instruments: protaper universal versus protaper.
Unal GC; Maden M; Savgat A; Onur Orhan E
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2009 Jun; 107(6):886-92. PubMed ID: 19386519
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
