Comparison of balanced forces, endosonic, and step-back filing instrumentation techniques: quantification of extruded apical debris
- PMID: 2388013
- DOI: 10.1016/S0099-2399(07)80026-4
Comparison of balanced forces, endosonic, and step-back filing instrumentation techniques: quantification of extruded apical debris
Abstract
Randomly assigned groups of 15 single-canal, extracted human teeth were instrumented by one of three techniques: balanced forces, endosonic, or step-back filing. Debris extruded from the apical foramen during instrumentation was collected onto preweighed filters using a suction filtration apparatus. Following desiccation, weight determinations were made on an analytical electrobalance. A one-factor analysis of variance was performed on the debris weight data revealing that the endosonic technique apically extruded significantly more debris than the balanced forces technique (p less than 0.05). Further analysis of the data, excluding debris weights greater than 1 SD from the mean, using a one-factor analysis of variance revealed the balanced forces technique apically extruded significantly less debris than either endosonic or step-back filing techniques (p less than 0.05). No significant difference was demonstrated between endosonic and step-back filing techniques.
Similar articles
-
A comparison of weights of debris extruded apically by conventional filing and Canal Master techniques.J Endod. 1991 Jun;17(6):275-9. doi: 10.1016/S0099-2399(06)81866-2. J Endod. 1991. PMID: 1940753
-
Comparison of debris extruded apically in straight canals: conventional filing versus profile .04 Taper series 29.J Endod. 1998 Jan;24(1):18-22. doi: 10.1016/S0099-2399(98)80206-9. J Endod. 1998. PMID: 9487860
-
Apical extrusion of debris using two hand and two rotary instrumentation techniques.J Endod. 1998 Mar;24(3):180-3. doi: 10.1016/S0099-2399(98)80179-9. J Endod. 1998. PMID: 9558583
-
The efficacy of step-down procedures during endosonic instrumentation.J Endod. 1991 Mar;17(3):111-5. doi: 10.1016/S0099-2399(06)81740-1. J Endod. 1991. PMID: 1940723
-
Evaluation of apically extruded debris in conventional and rotary instrumentation techniques.J Calif Dent Assoc. 2004 Sep;32(9):665-71. J Calif Dent Assoc. 2004. PMID: 15553960
Cited by
-
Comparison of debris extruded apically and working time used by ProTaper Universal rotary and ProTaper retreatment system during gutta-percha removal.J Appl Oral Sci. 2010 Dec;18(6):542-5. doi: 10.1590/s1678-77572010000600002. J Appl Oral Sci. 2010. PMID: 21308282 Free PMC article.
-
Apical extrusion of debris in four different endodontic instrumentation systems: A meta-analysis.J Conserv Dent. 2017 Jan-Feb;20(1):30-36. doi: 10.4103/0972-0707.209066. J Conserv Dent. 2017. PMID: 28761250 Free PMC article.
-
A Novel Hybrid Hand Instrumentation Technique for Root Canal Preparation.Iran Endod J. 2018 Fall;13(4):461-468. doi: 10.22037/iej.v13i4.19179. Iran Endod J. 2018. PMID: 36883023 Free PMC article.
-
A Comparative Study on the Amount of Extruded Material from the Apical Foramen with NiTi Rotary and Stainless Steel Hand Instruments.Iran Endod J. 2006 Summer;1(2):69-72. Epub 2006 Jul 1. Iran Endod J. 2006. PMID: 24470804 Free PMC article.
-
In Vitro Comparison of Apically Extruded Debris during Root Canal Preparation of Mandibular Premolars with Manual and Rotary Instruments.J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects. 2015 Summer;9(3):131-7. doi: 10.15171/joddd.2015.026. Epub 2015 Sep 16. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects. 2015. PMID: 26697144 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources