120 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9545932)
1. Root canal cleanliness after preparation with different endodontic handpieces and hand instruments: a comparative SEM investigation.
Hülsmann M; Rümmelin C; Schäfers F
J Endod; 1997 May; 23(5):301-6. PubMed ID: 9545932
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Root Canal Instrumentation: Current Trends and Future Perspectives.
Srivastava S
Cureus; 2024 Apr; 16(4):e58045. PubMed ID: 38738101
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Debris and Smear Layer Removal in Curved Root Canals: A Comparative Study of Ultrasonic and Sonic Irrigant Activation Techniques.
Wigler R; Srour Y; Wilchfort Y; Metzger Z; Kfir A
Dent J (Basel); 2024 Feb; 12(3):. PubMed ID: 38534274
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The Influence of Nickel-Titanium (Ni-Ti) Rotary Instrument Systems on Debris and Smear Layer Formation in Endodontic Procedures: An In Vitro Scanning Electron Microscopy Study.
Mali S; Patil A; Sharma D; Jaiswal H; Saoji HA; Sinha A; Singh R
Cureus; 2024 Feb; 16(2):e54310. PubMed ID: 38496119
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Morphometric micro-CT study of contralateral mandibular incisors.
Sevgi U; Johnsen GF; Hussain B; Piasecki L; Nogueira LP; Haugen HJ
Clin Oral Investig; 2023 Dec; 28(1):20. PubMed ID: 38147175
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Sealing Ability of Nano-fast Cement
Moazzami F; Ghorbani Jahandizi N; Shokouhi MM; Ghahramani Y
Iran Endod J; 2023; 18(4):206-210. PubMed ID: 37829831
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Efficacy of Different Irrigant Activation Systems on Debris and Smear Layer Removal: A Scanning Electron Microscopy Evaluation.
Wigler R; Herteanu M; Wilchfort Y; Kfir A
Int J Dent; 2023; 2023():9933524. PubMed ID: 37771362
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparison of Three Activating Methods of Irrigation on Smear Layer- and Debris-Removal Efficiency After WaveOne Gold® Single File.
Jabbour E; Sabbagh J; Koyess E; Feghali M
Acta Inform Med; 2023 Jun; 31(2):131-136. PubMed ID: 37719232
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Comparison of Cleaning Efficacy of Different Rotary Files in Primary Teeth-An
Alqarni AS
J Pharm Bioallied Sci; 2023 Jul; 15(Suppl 1):S442-S446. PubMed ID: 37654264
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Comparison of vapor bubble kinetics and cleaning efficacy of different root canal irrigation techniques in the apical area beyond the fractured instrument.
Liu J; Watanabe S; Mochizuki S; Kouno A; Okiji T
J Dent Sci; 2023 Jul; 18(3):1141-1147. PubMed ID: 37404607
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The effects of laser and ultrasonic irrigation activation methods on smear and debris removal in traditional and conservative endodontic access cavities.
Gündüz H; Özlek E
Lasers Med Sci; 2023 Jun; 38(1):148. PubMed ID: 37358660
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Cleaning and Disinfecting Oval-Shaped Root Canals: Ex Vivo Evaluation of Three Rotary Instrumentation Systems with Passive Ultrasonic Irrigation.
Li Y; Wang Z; Bao P; Meng T; Liu M; Li H; Shen Y; Liu D; Jia Z; Liu H
Medicina (Kaunas); 2023 May; 59(5):. PubMed ID: 37241194
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. A Comparative Study on the Shaping Ability and Cleaning Efficiency of Two Different Single-File Systems, Reciprocating Wave One Versus Continuous Rotation F360, Evaluated by Scanning Electron Microscope: An In Vitro Study.
Samudrala A; Majeti C; Chowdary KH; Potru LB; Yaragani A; Kumar YP; Sidhu GK; Kathuria NS
Cureus; 2023 Apr; 15(4):e37503. PubMed ID: 37187639
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Evaluation of Apically Extruded Debris and Cleaning Efficiency of the Pediatric Rotary File System and the Manual Nickel-Titanium File System.
Habib A; Hegazi E; Mahfouz S
Cureus; 2023 Mar; 15(3):e36603. PubMed ID: 37155435
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The Evaluation of Debris and Smear Layer Generated by Three Rotary Instruments Neo NiTi, 2Shape and Revo_S: An
Ashraf H; Zargar N; Zandi B; Azizi A; Amiri M
Iran Endod J; 2023; 18(2):96-103. PubMed ID: 37152856
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Effectiveness of Sodium Hypochlorite plus EDTA Compared with Peracetic Acid in Removing Smear Layer and Killing
Grando CP; Martinez EF; Fontana CE; Pedro Rocha DG; Pessoa Stringheta C; da Silveira Bueno CE
Iran Endod J; 2019; 14(1):56-62. PubMed ID: 36879593
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Evaluating the Effectiveness of Different Irrigant Activation Techniques in Removing the Smear Layer and Opening the Dentinal Canals: A Scanning Electron Microscopic Study.
Ahmad Ali I; Layous K; Alzoubi H
Cureus; 2023 Jan; 15(1):e33961. PubMed ID: 36820109
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparative evaluation of canal cleanliness at apical third using Self-Adjusting File and Wave One File with different irrigants: an
Bakthavatchalam B; Ranjani MS; Amudhalakshmi K; Dhanalakshmi S
Med Pharm Rep; 2023 Jan; 96(1):79-85. PubMed ID: 36818323
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Comparison of the Efficacy of NeoNiTi, ProTaper, and Reciproc Files in the Retreatment of Curved Root Canals: a CBCT Assessment.
Adel M; Tofangchiha M; Rashvand E; Moutabha I; Roohi N; Reda R; Testarelli L
Acta Stomatol Croat; 2022 Dec; 56(4):351-362. PubMed ID: 36713275
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Evaluation of Residual Debris and Smear layer After Root Canal Preparation by Three Different Methods: A Scanning Electron Microscopy Study.
Zargar N; Naseri M; Gholizadeh Z; Mehrabinia P
Iran Endod J; 2022; 17(3):138-145. PubMed ID: 36704081
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
