A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Variability of master gutta-percha cones. | LitMetric

The common technique to hermetically fill prepared root canals involves the use of "standardised" gutta-percha cones that are selected to fit the apical portion of the prepared canal space. These gutta-percha cones are manufactured to conform to a standard size and taper which should correspond to the size and taper of standard root canal instruments. Clinical observation of commercially available gutta-percha cones seemed to indicate that there is wide variation in the diameter and taper of "standardised" gutta-percha cones within the size range 25-35. The present study was undertaken to determine how closely current commercially available gutta-percha cones sizes 25, 30 and 35 conformed to the current ISO standard, and was initiated by the above clinical observation. It was not the purpose of this study to compare the results from different brands or manufacturers, but rather to establish whether commercially available gutta-percha cones collectively conformed to expected standardised sizes. One phial of cones for each of the sizes 25, 30 and 35 of eight different brands was selected for examination. The diameter of each of ten cones for each size from each brand was measured at two points, at 1 mm and at 6 mm from the tip of the cone. The results obtained for each size and each brand were tabulated and compared with ISO 6877:1995 for dental root canal obturating cones. This study demonstrated wide variability for cones from all brands, for all sizes, when individual cones of the same size were compared. While collectively the arithmetic means showed a closer correlation to the ISO Standard, irrespective of the brand size of the cone, or whether the cone was measured at 1 mm or 6 mm, many individual cones showed a great variation from the ideal. The need for less variability is discussed. It is concluded that ISO standard 6877:1995 is inappropriate- and allows for too much variation in the size of "standardised" gutta-percha cones.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-4477.2002.tb00365.xDOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

gutta-percha cones
32
cones
14
"standardised" gutta-percha
12
commercially gutta-percha
12
cones size
12
iso standard
12
gutta-percha
8
size
8
size taper
8
root canal
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!