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

Fracture resistance of root-filled teeth after cavity preparation with conventional burs, Er: YAG and Er,Cr: YSGG lasers. | LitMetric

Purpose: The aim of the present study is to compare the fracture resistance of teeth after access cavity preparation with conventional rotary burs, Erbium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet laser (Er:YAG) and Erbium, cromium: yttrium scandium gallium garnet laser (Er,Cr:YSGG) lasers.

Materials And Methods: Fifty five intact mandibular molars were divided into 3 negative groups (groups 1, 2, 3; n=5 for each), 3 study groups (groups 4, 5, 6; n=10 for each) and 1 positive control group (intact teeth; n=10). Access cavities of groups 1, 2 and 3 were prepared with conventional burs, Er:YAG laser and Er,Cr:YSGG laser respectively. After root canal obturation, their coronal portions were left non-restored. Access cavities of groups 4, 5 and 6 were prepared by using the same equipment but their coronal portions were restored with composite resinafter root canal obturation. Following thermocycling, fracture strength was evaluated with a Universal Testing Machine. Mean force at which each sample is fractured was recorded in Newton unit and statistically analyzed.

Results: Fracture resistance of group 7 (intact teeth) was significantly higher than all other groups (p<0.001). Differences among the fracture resistance values of groups 4, 5 and 6 were not significantly different but they were significantly higher than those of groups 1, 2 and 3 (p<0.001). No significant difference was found between Groups 1, 2 and 3.

Conclusion: Preparing access cavities with either laser or bur has no effect on the fracture resistance of teeth with root canal treatment.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6365126PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.26650/eor.2018.442DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

fracture resistance
12
cavity preparation
8
preparation conventional
8
conventional burs
8
garnet laser
8
laser ercrysgg
8
groups groups
8
group intact
8
intact teeth
8
access cavities
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!