Basit öğe kaydını göster

dc.contributor.authorEkim, Sefika Nur Akyuz
dc.contributor.authorErdemir, Ali
dc.date.accessioned2020-06-25T18:13:33Z
dc.date.available2020-06-25T18:13:33Z
dc.date.issued2015
dc.identifier.citationclosedAccessen_US
dc.identifier.issn1059-910X
dc.identifier.issn1097-0029
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1002/jemt.22466
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12587/6220
dc.descriptionErdemir, Ali/0000-0003-1140-3887; Erdemir, Ali/0000-0002-6489-9620en_US
dc.descriptionWOS: 000350130200006en_US
dc.descriptionPubMed: 25582378en_US
dc.description.abstractThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficiency of different irrigation activation techniques on smear layer removal. About 80 single-rooted human maxillary central teeth were decoronated to a standardized length.The samples were prepared by using ProTaper system to size F4 and divided into eight equal groups (n=10) according to the final irrigation activation technique; distilled water was used as an irrigant in Group 1. The other groups were treated with 2.5% NaOCl and 17% EDTA, respectively. Conventional syringe irrigation (CSI) was used in Group 2. Irrigation solutions were activated using passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI, Group 3), EndoVac apical negative pressure (ANP, Group 4), diode laser (Group 5), Nd:YAG laser (Group 6), Er:YAG laser (Group 7), and Er:YAG laser using with photon-induced photoacoustic streaming (PIPS, Group 8). Teeth were split longitudinally and subjected to scanning electron microscope (SEM). PIPS showed the best removal of smear layer when compared with PUI, ANP, Nd:YAG, and Er:YAG, but the difference was not statistically significant (P>0.05). Smear layer scores obtained with PIPS technique were statistically significant different from those of obtained with control, CSI and diode laser groups (P<0.05). All experimental irrigation techniques except ANP and diode laser removed smear layer more effectively at the coronal and middle levels compared to the apical level (P<0.05). Irrigation activated/delivered techniques except diode laser have a positive effect on removing of smear layer. Microsc. Res. Tech. 78:230-239, 2015. (c) 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipScientific Research Projects Coordination Center of Kirikkale University, Kirikkale/TurkeyKirikkale University [2012/93]en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipThis research, as part of the Doctoral thesis of Dr. Sefika Nur Akyuz Ekim, was supported by Scientific Research Projects Coordination Center (Project number: 2012/93) of Kirikkale University, Kirikkale/Turkey. The authors would also like to thank Dt. Zafer Kazak for his kindness in helping and for supplying the laser devices from Medikadent/Turkey.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherWileyen_US
dc.relation.isversionof10.1002/jemt.22466en_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subjectEndoVacen_US
dc.subjectEr:YAGen_US
dc.subjectirrigation activationen_US
dc.subjectphoton-induced photacoustic streamingen_US
dc.titleComparison of Different Irrigation Activation Techniques on Smear Layer Removal: An in vitro Studyen_US
dc.typearticleen_US
dc.contributor.departmentKırıkkale Üniversitesien_US
dc.identifier.volume78en_US
dc.identifier.issue3en_US
dc.identifier.startpage230en_US
dc.identifier.endpage239en_US
dc.relation.journalMicroscopy Research And Techniqueen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US


Bu öğenin dosyaları:

Thumbnail

Bu öğe aşağıdaki koleksiyon(lar)da görünmektedir.

Basit öğe kaydını göster