Notes
Notes - notes.io |
The purpose of this systematic review was to provide the answer to the question Can sodium hypochlorite and chlorhexidine influence postoperative pain after the endodontic treatment in necrotic teeth?
The PROSPERO registration number is CRD42018096433 and was conducted following the PRISMA statements. The MeSH and free terms were used to search for articles published in the electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Virtual Health Library), in the gray literature, and by a manual search. The reviewers selected the studies considering predetermined eligibility criteria, performed data extraction, and evaluated the risk of bias. Only clinical trials comparing the effect of sodium hypochlorite and chlorhexidine on postoperative pain in teeth of adult patients with necrotic pulps were included.
Five studies were qualified for the systematic review. Two studies were considered a low risk of bias. The results showed no statistically significant difference regarding postoperative pain in the groups. Only 1 study reported a statistically significant difference in the sixth postoperative hour, and the pain was associated with the sodium hypochlorite group.
There was no influence of auxiliary chemical substance (NaOCl and CHX) on postoperative pain used in endodontic treatment in the teeth with pulp necrosis. However, one study observed a significant difference in the sixth postoperative hour, associated with the sodium hypochlorite group.
There was no influence of auxiliary chemical substance (NaOCl and CHX) on postoperative pain used in endodontic treatment in the teeth with pulp necrosis. However, one study observed a significant difference in the sixth postoperative hour, associated with the sodium hypochlorite group.
To investigate the influence of sonic agitation or laser-activated irrigation techniques on the removal chlorhexidine (CHX) and modified triple antibiotic paste (mTAP) on the sealer penetration depth and dislocation resistance of Guttaflow Bioseal.
Single-rooted mandibular premolars (n=96) were prepared with rotary nickel titanium instruments and randomly divided into two groups (n=48) based on the intracanal medicaments used Group 1, mTAP; Group 2, CHX gel. After 7 days, the specimens in each group were divided into three subgroups (n=16) based on the supplementary irrigation technique used to remove the medicaments laser activated irrigation (Er, Cr YSGG laser, Waterlase MD, Biolase Technology Inc., San Clemente, CA, USA), sonic agitation (EndoActivator, Dentslpy Sirona Endodontics, PA, USA) and syringe-and-needle irrigation (control) techniques. Canals were filled with single matched-taper gutta-percha cone and a calcium silicate-based sealer (GuttaFlow® Bioseal, Coltène/Whaledent, Langenau, Germany). sealer.
Er,Cr;YSGG laser irrigation to remove the medicaments was advantageous to other irrigation techniques in sealer penetration and dislocation resistance of the sealer.
Consistent reporting of publications in a given topic is essential. This systematic review aimed to identify and evaluate the reporting items in previous publications related to root canal anatomy in major Endodontic journals.
A systematic review was undertaken following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A comprehensive literature search was performed by 2 independent reviewers using a customized search strategy in major Endodontic journals through Scopus until November 2019. Studies investigating root and canal anatomy were included. The selected publications were divided into 7 categories according to the study design micro-computed tomography (microCT) and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) experimental studies (extracted teeth), CBCT and 2D clinical studies, CBCT and 2D case reports in addition to others (i.e. staining and clearing method and root sectioning). The selected studies were evaluated according to three domains 1) Criteria for stud there is considerable inconsistent reporting of root and canal morphology regardless of the type of study and experimental procedure used. The PROUD checklist protocol presented in this systematic review aims to provide an accurate description of root canal anatomy in experimental, clinical, and case report publications.
Despite accurate presentation of certain items, there is considerable inconsistent reporting of root and canal morphology regardless of the type of study and experimental procedure used. The PROUD checklist protocol presented in this systematic review aims to provide an accurate description of root canal anatomy in experimental, clinical, and case report publications.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the shear bond strength (SBS) of hydraulic calcium silicate (Biodentine) as a core material to the e.max ceramic restoration.
Forty discs (6 mm diameter; 2 mm thickness) were fabricated from each core material, Hydraulic calcium silicate [Biodentine™, Septodont], resin composite [Filtek™Z250 XT, 3M ESPE], and resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) [GC Fuji II LC, GC Corporation]. Dentine surfaces of 40 extracted human permanent molars were exposed and used as a control group. Eprosartan mw All specimens were mounted in self-curing acrylic resin. One hundred sixty IPS e.max discs were fabricated (4 mm diameter; 2 mm thickness) and cemented to the core specimens with Variolink N (IvoclarVivadent). After storage in distilled water (37oC; 24h), the specimens were thermocycled 1.500 times. SBS was tested using a universal testing machine at 0.05 mm/min crosshead speed. The fracture modes were determined by a stereomicroscope at ×20 magnification. Data were analyzed using one-waine is indicated to be used as core material for pulp preservation, it is recommended to be covered with a layer of resin composite material to enhance its bonding strength to the e.max restoration.
The purpose of this randomized, double-blind study was to evaluate the anesthetic efficacy of lidocaine-ketorolac administration by Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block (IANB) in patients with irreversible pulpitis.
Eighty-eight adult patients received a combination of either one cartridge of '2% lidocaine with 1 80.000 epinephrine' (Li) plus one cartridge of a mixture of 0.8 mL of the same solution and 1mL ketorolac tromethamine (KT)(30 mg/mL), or one cartridge of Li solution plus one cartridge of a mixture of the same solution and saline. Endodontic access was prepared after fifteen minutes. Anesthetic success was defined as no or mild pain [less than 54 mm on the Heft-Parker visual analog scale (HP-VAS)] during access cavity preparation and initial file insertion. Chi-square test was used for data analysis, and the level of significance was set at 0.05 (P=0.05).
Results showed that the success rates were 34.1% and 27.3% for Li-KT and Li-Saline groups, respectively, with no significant difference between the two groups (P=0.
Read More: https://www.selleckchem.com/products/eprosartan-mesylate.html
![]() |
Notes is a web-based application for online taking notes. You can take your notes and share with others people. If you like taking long notes, notes.io is designed for you. To date, over 8,000,000,000+ notes created and continuing...
With notes.io;
- * You can take a note from anywhere and any device with internet connection.
- * You can share the notes in social platforms (YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, instagram etc.).
- * You can quickly share your contents without website, blog and e-mail.
- * You don't need to create any Account to share a note. As you wish you can use quick, easy and best shortened notes with sms, websites, e-mail, or messaging services (WhatsApp, iMessage, Telegram, Signal).
- * Notes.io has fabulous infrastructure design for a short link and allows you to share the note as an easy and understandable link.
Fast: Notes.io is built for speed and performance. You can take a notes quickly and browse your archive.
Easy: Notes.io doesn’t require installation. Just write and share note!
Short: Notes.io’s url just 8 character. You’ll get shorten link of your note when you want to share. (Ex: notes.io/q )
Free: Notes.io works for 14 years and has been free since the day it was started.
You immediately create your first note and start sharing with the ones you wish. If you want to contact us, you can use the following communication channels;
Email: [email protected]
Twitter: http://twitter.com/notesio
Instagram: http://instagram.com/notes.io
Facebook: http://facebook.com/notesio
Regards;
Notes.io Team
