455 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20647098)
1. In vitro comparisons of debris removal of the EndoActivator system, the F file, ultrasonic irrigation, and NaOCl irrigation alone after hand-rotary instrumentation in human mandibular molars.
Klyn SL; Kirkpatrick TC; Rutledge RE
J Endod; 2010 Aug; 36(8):1367-71. PubMed ID: 20647098
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Hard-tissue debris accumulation created by conventional rotary versus self-adjusting file instrumentation in mesial root canal systems of mandibular molars.
Paqué F; Al-Jadaa A; Kfir A
Int Endod J; 2012 May; 45(5):413-8. PubMed ID: 22188277
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. In vitro canal and isthmus debris removal of the self-adjusting file, K3, and WaveOne files in the mesial root of human mandibular molars.
Dietrich MA; Kirkpatrick TC; Yaccino JM
J Endod; 2012 Aug; 38(8):1140-4. PubMed ID: 22794223
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. 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]
7. Comparison of debris removal with three different irrigation techniques.
Howard RK; Kirkpatrick TC; Rutledge RE; Yaccino JM
J Endod; 2011 Sep; 37(9):1301-5. PubMed ID: 21846554
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. 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]
10. 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]
11. 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]
12. Canal and isthmus debridement efficacy using a sonic irrigation technique in a closed-canal system.
Johnson M; Sidow SJ; Looney SW; Lindsey K; Niu LN; Tay FR
J Endod; 2012 Sep; 38(9):1265-8. PubMed ID: 22892748
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The influence of volume, type of irrigant and flushing method on removing artificially placed dentine debris from the apical root canal during passive ultrasonic irrigation.
van der Sluis LW; Gambarini G; Wu MK; Wesselink PR
Int Endod J; 2006 Jun; 39(6):472-6. PubMed ID: 16674742
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparative evaluation of canal isthmus debridement efficacy of modified EndoVac technique with different irrigation systems.
Thomas AR; Velmurugan N; Smita S; Jothilatha S
J Endod; 2014 Oct; 40(10):1676-80. PubMed ID: 25052146
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Effectiveness of the EndoActivator System in removing the smear layer after root canal instrumentation.
Uroz-Torres D; González-Rodríguez MP; Ferrer-Luque CM
J Endod; 2010 Feb; 36(2):308-11. PubMed ID: 20113797
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. 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]
18. Efficacy of the NaviTip FX irrigation needle in removing post instrumentation canal smear layer and debris in curved root canals.
Zmener O; Pameijer CH; Serrano SA; Palo RM; Iglesias EF
J Endod; 2009 Sep; 35(9):1270-3. PubMed ID: 19720229
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Efficacy of irrigation systems on penetration of sodium hypochlorite to working length and to simulated uninstrumented areas in oval shaped root canals.
de Gregorio C; Paranjpe A; Garcia A; Navarrete N; Estevez R; Esplugues EO; Cohenca N
Int Endod J; 2012 May; 45(5):475-81. PubMed ID: 22283697
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Histologic evaluation of canal and isthmus debridement efficacies of two different irrigant delivery techniques in a closed system.
Adcock JM; Sidow SJ; Looney SW; Liu Y; McNally K; Lindsey K; Tay FR
J Endod; 2011 Apr; 37(4):544-8. PubMed ID: 21419306
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
