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: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
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
The purpose of this study was to investigate the ability of dentists to remove composite fillings from endodontic access cavities using illumination from a conventional light source (CLS) versus the fluorescence-aided identification technique (FIT) in terms of completeness, selectivity and treatment duration. Therefore, two independent operators removed composite resin from six sets of root-filled incisors in a maxillary model under simulated clinical conditions using the CLS or FIT method (twelve teeth per operator and technique). The duration of treatment was recorded and before-after micro-CT scans were superimposed for volumetric assessment of treatment completeness and selectivity. Statistical significance was determined by t-testing and two-way ANOVA for operator comparison. Overall, there was no significant difference between FIT and CLS in terms of volume, height and area of composite residues (p=0.98 / p=0.75 / p=0.64) and regarding hard tissue loss in terms of volume, depth and area (p= 0.93 / p= 0.70 / p= 0.14). However, there was a significant difference between the two groups regarding treatment time (FIT= 428s, CLS=523s; p=0.023). Significant differences between operators regardless of method were found for volume, height and area of composite residues (p<0.05) and also for defect area (p=0.01) and time (p<0.001). Significant differences between operators including the method was only found for height of composites (p=0.037). It can be concluded, that composite remnants and tooth structure losses may occur after reentry of root-filled teeth regardless of the illumination method (conventional vs. fluorescence-aided) and operator, but preparation was less time-consuming with FIT.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.61872/sdj-2021-07-08-01 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!