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

Impact of LASER activated irrigation on the retrievability of Guttaflow bioseal (in-vitro study). | LitMetric

Background: This study aimed to evaluate the efficiency of diode LASER activated irrigation in the removal of GuttaFlow Bioseal root canal filling material during retreatment.

Materials And Subjects: Root canals of forty-five single-rooted human mandibular premolar teeth were prepared with ProTaper Universal rotary system and obturated with lateral condensation obturation technique using Gutta Percha and Roeko GuttaFlow Bioseal root canal sealer. All specimens were retreated with ProTaper Universal Retreatment System files then divided to three different groups according to the technique of activation of irrigation. Samples were sectioned, and the residual filling remnants were captured using digital camera attached to microscope. Data was collected by three different interpreters, to eliminate the subjectivity of the process, using the ImageJ Software. The mean value of the data was obtained and evaluated statistically. The significance level was set at P ≤ 0.05.

Results: The remaining filling materials in the canals irrigated with ultrasonic activation (6.17 ± 1.42 at coronal level, 10.93 ± 1.91at middle level, and 14.58 ± 2.23 at apical level) were less than these irrigated with LASER activation (15.87 ± 3.78 at coronal level, 21.28 ± 4.44 at middle level, and 27.06 ± 2.68 at apical level). Maximum amount of remaining filling materials was present in the canals irrigated with passive side-vented syringe (23.07 ± 3.22 at coronal level, 38.09 ± 7.27 at middle level, and 34.24 ± 9.77 at apical level).

Conclusion: The activation of irrigation techniques used were incapable of complete removal of filling material at root canal walls.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11390717PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41405-024-00254-zDOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

guttaflow bioseal
12
root canal
12
coronal level
12
middle level
12
level
9
laser activated
8
activated irrigation
8
bioseal root
8
filling material
8
protaper universal
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!