Print this page Email this page Users Online: 181
Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2016  |  Volume : 10  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 43-46

Evaluation of root-end cavity preparation using erbium, chromium:yttrium, scandium, gallium, and garnet laser, ultrasonic retrotips, and conventional burs


Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Maulana Azad Institute of Dental Sciences, New Delhi, India

Correspondence Address:
Sarika Chaudhry
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Maulana Azad Institute of Dental Sciences, MAMC Complex, BSZ Marg, New Delhi - 110 002
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/2321-1385.196989

Rights and Permissions

Aim: To compare root-end cavities prepared with ultrasonics (Group A), with those created by burs in a conventional handpiece (Group B) and erbium, chromium:yttrium, scandium, gallium, and garnet (Er, Cr:YSGG) laser (Group C). Materials and Methods: After root canal instrumentation and filling, apices of 60 single-rooted teeth were resected. Retrograde Class I cavities 3 mm deep were prepared using ultrasonic retro-prep tips (Group A), round burs (Group B), and Er:YSGG laser (Group C). An ultrasonic unit was used with computed tomography-5 retrotip at the frequency of 32 KHz. Laser beam parameters were a pulse of very short duration (100 s), energy of 280 mJ, and repetition rate of 10 Hz. The apical root portion and root-end cavities were replicated and prepared for stereomicroscopic analysis. Results: The degree of chipping associated with the margin of the root-end cavities and the incidence of root face cracks were noted. Marginal chipping of root-end cavities prepared using ultrasonic instrumentation was significantly higher than that produced by bur (P < 0.001) or laser, with laser group showing the least amount of chipping. Conclusion: There was a significant difference between the number of cracks produced by the three methods, with the laser group having the least number of cracks and marginal chipping.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed382    
    Printed23    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded95    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal