326 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26323446)
1. Determination of Root Canal Cleanliness by Different Irrigation Methods and Morphometric Analysis of Apical Third.
Seixas FH; Estrela C; Bueno MR; Sousa-Neto MD; Pécora JD
J Contemp Dent Pract; 2015 Jun; 16(6):442-50. PubMed ID: 26323446
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Smear layer production by 3 rotary reamers with different cutting blade designs in straight root canals: a scanning electron microscopic study.
Jeon IS; Spångberg LS; Yoon TC; Kazemi RB; Kum KY
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2003 Nov; 96(5):601-7. PubMed ID: 14600696
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. A scanning electron microscopic study of debris and smear layer remaining following use of AET instruments and K-flexofiles.
Drukteinis S; Balciuniene I
Stomatologija; 2006; 8(3):70-5. PubMed ID: 17191061
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparative Evaluation of Smear Layer and Debris on the Canal Walls prepared with a Combination of Hand and Rotary ProTaper Technique using Scanning Electron Microscope.
Kiran S; Prakash S; Siddharth PR; Saha S; Geojan NE; Ramachandran M
J Contemp Dent Pract; 2016 Jul; 17(7):574-81. PubMed ID: 27595725
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Cleaning efficiency of anatomic endodontic technology, ProFile System and Manual Instrumentation in oval-shaped root canals: an in vitro study.
Reddy ES; Sainath D; Narenderreddy M; Pasari S; Vallikanthan S; Sindhurareddy G
J Contemp Dent Pract; 2013 Jul; 14(4):629-34. PubMed ID: 24309340
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Debris remaining in the apical third of root canals after chemomechanical preparation by using sodium hypochlorite and glyde: an in vivo study.
Cruz A; Vera J; Gascón G; Palafox-Sánchez CA; Amezcua O; Mercado G
J Endod; 2014 Sep; 40(9):1419-23. PubMed ID: 25146024
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. 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]
9. Influence of root canal taper on its cleanliness: a scanning electron microscopic study.
Arvaniti IS; Khabbaz MG
J Endod; 2011 Jun; 37(6):871-4. PubMed ID: 21787508
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Comparative study of root-canal preparation using Lightspeed and Quantec SC rotary NiTi instruments.
Hülsmann M; Herbst U; Schäfers F
Int Endod J; 2003 Nov; 36(11):748-56. PubMed ID: 14641438
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. A comparative study of root canal preparation with HERO 642 and Quantec SC rotary Ni-Ti instruments.
Hülsmann M; Schade M; Schäfers F
Int Endod J; 2001 Oct; 34(7):538-46. PubMed ID: 11601772
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. Root canal debris removal using different irrigating needles: an SEM study.
Ghivari S; Kubasad G
Indian J Dent Res; 2011; 22(5):659-63. PubMed ID: 22406709
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Instrument separation analysis of multi-used ProTaper Universal rotary system during root canal therapy.
Wu J; Lei G; Yan M; Yu Y; Yu J; Zhang G
J Endod; 2011 Jun; 37(6):758-63. PubMed ID: 21787484
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. A comparative study of root canal preparation using FlexMaster and HERO 642 rotary Ni-Ti instruments.
Hülsmann M; Gressmann G; Schäfers F
Int Endod J; 2003 May; 36(5):358-66. PubMed ID: 12752650
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. A comparative study of root canal preparation using Profile .04 and Lightspeed rotary Ni-Ti instruments.
Versümer J; Hülsmann M; Schäfers F
Int Endod J; 2002 Jan; 35(1):37-46. PubMed ID: 11853237
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Effectiveness of different final irrigation protocols in removing debris in flattened root canals.
Nadalin MR; Perez DE; Vansan LP; Paschoala C; Souza-Neto MD; Saquy PC
Braz Dent J; 2009; 20(3):211-4. PubMed ID: 19784466
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Comparative evaluation of shaping ability of two nickel-titanium rotary systems using cone beam computed tomography.
Celikten B; Uzuntas CF; Kursun S; Orhan AI; Tufenkci P; Orhan K; Demiralp KÖ
BMC Oral Health; 2015 Mar; 15():32. PubMed ID: 25887521
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Micro-CT analyses of apical enlargement and molar root canal complexity.
Markvart M; Darvann TA; Larsen P; Dalstra M; Kreiborg S; Bjørndal L
Int Endod J; 2012 Mar; 45(3):273-81. PubMed ID: 22044111
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
