458 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23603086)
1. Wall shear stress effects of different endodontic irrigation techniques and systems.
Goode N; Khan S; Eid AA; Niu LN; Gosier J; Susin LF; Pashley DH; Tay FR
J Dent; 2013 Jul; 41(7):636-41. PubMed ID: 23603086
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. Root canal debridement using manual dynamic agitation or the EndoVac for final irrigation in a closed system and an open system.
Parente JM; Loushine RJ; Susin L; Gu L; Looney SW; Weller RN; Pashley DH; Tay FR
Int Endod J; 2010 Nov; 43(11):1001-12. PubMed ID: 20722753
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A comparative study of the debridement efficacy and apical extrusion of dynamic and passive root canal irrigation systems.
Alkahtani A; Al Khudhairi TD; Anil S
BMC Oral Health; 2014 Feb; 14():12. PubMed ID: 24512441
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. 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]
8. 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]
9. Comparison of final irrigation techniques in removal of calcium hydroxide.
Yücel AÇ; Gürel M; Güler E; Karabucak B
Aust Endod J; 2013 Dec; 39(3):116-21. PubMed ID: 24279657
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Effectiveness of different irrigant agitation techniques on debris and smear layer removal in curved root canals: a scanning electron microscopy study.
Rödig T; Döllmann S; Konietschke F; Drebenstedt S; Hülsmann M
J Endod; 2010 Dec; 36(12):1983-7. PubMed ID: 21092817
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Irrigation dynamics associated with positive pressure, apical negative pressure and passive ultrasonic irrigations: a computational fluid dynamics analysis.
Chen JE; Nurbakhsh B; Layton G; Bussmann M; Kishen A
Aust Endod J; 2014 Aug; 40(2):54-60. PubMed ID: 25244218
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. In vivo efficacy of three different endodontic irrigation systems for irrigant delivery to working length of mesial canals of mandibular molars.
Munoz HR; Camacho-Cuadra K
J Endod; 2012 Apr; 38(4):445-8. PubMed ID: 22414827
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Spectrophotometric determination of irrigant extrusion using passive ultrasonic irrigation, EndoActivator, or syringe irrigation.
Rodríguez-Figueroa C; McClanahan SB; Bowles WR
J Endod; 2014 Oct; 40(10):1622-6. PubMed ID: 25260734
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Influence of an apical negative pressure irrigation system on bacterial elimination during endodontic therapy: a prospective randomized clinical study.
Pawar R; Alqaied A; Safavi K; Boyko J; Kaufman B
J Endod; 2012 Sep; 38(9):1177-81. PubMed ID: 22892731
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Effect of different final irrigation methods on the removal of calcium hydroxide from an artificial standardized groove in the apical third of root canals.
Capar ID; Ozcan E; Arslan H; Ertas H; Aydinbelge HA
J Endod; 2014 Mar; 40(3):451-4. PubMed ID: 24565670
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Debris and smear removal in flattened root canals after use of different irrigant agitation protocols.
Ribeiro EM; Silva-Sousa YT; Souza-Gabriel AE; Sousa-Neto MD; Lorencetti KT; Silva SR
Microsc Res Tech; 2012 Jun; 75(6):781-90. PubMed ID: 22131294
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Efficacy and safety of various active irrigation devices when used with either positive or negative pressure: an in vitro study.
Malentacca A; Uccioli U; Zangari D; Lajolo C; Fabiani C
J Endod; 2012 Dec; 38(12):1622-6. PubMed ID: 23146649
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparison of ultrasonic irrigation and RinsEndo for the removal of calcium hydroxide and Ledermix paste from root canals.
Rödig T; Hirschleb M; Zapf A; Hülsmann M
Int Endod J; 2011 Dec; 44(12):1155-61. PubMed ID: 21910743
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Debris and irrigant extrusion potential of 2 rotary systems and irrigation needles.
Altundasar E; Nagas E; Uyanik O; Serper A
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2011 Oct; 112(4):e31-5. PubMed ID: 21778084
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Evaluation of triple antibiotic paste removal by different irrigation procedures.
Berkhoff JA; Chen PB; Teixeira FB; Diogenes A
J Endod; 2014 Aug; 40(8):1172-7. PubMed ID: 25069927
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
