Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 27, 2025

Scanning Electron Microscopic Evaluation of Surface Defects of Remover Retreatment File After Single and Multiple Uses
Published on: October 11, 2024
To compare and evaluate microcracks and smear layer after root end preparation by laser, ultrasonic tip, and
Jyotirmoyee Bhanja1, Shyam Agrawal1, Rachit Mathur1
1Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, NIMS Dental College and Hospital, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India.
Aim:
Evaluation of root-end cavities for the existence of microcracks and smear layer with laser, ultrasonic tip by conventional bur, and control group in single-rooted tooth by scanning electron microscope (SEM).
Methodology:
Fifty-two extracted fully developed single-rooted teeth were decoronated, cleaned, shaped, and obturated with F2 GP, and 3 mm roots were removed. Laser, ultrasonic tip (AS 3Dretro-tip on Newtron-SATELEC, Acteon), and conventional bur (size 010 round) were used to create root-end preparation. No root-end cavities were produced in the control group. SEM was used to check all samples for microcracks and smear layers.
Results:
A significant difference was found between microcrack formation in laser and conventional bur preparation (P = 0.002), and ultrasonic and laser (P = 0.015). Nonsignificant difference was found between ultrasonic and conventional bur (P = 0.046). The study concluded that maximum cracks were seen in conventional bur formation at the apical end of the root (0.85 ± 0.36) followed by the ultrasonic method (0.54 ± 0.23).
Conclusion:
Root-end cavities prepared with laser give fewer microcracks and less production of smear layer compared to the ultrasonic tip and conventional bur.
More Related Videos
06:16Author Spotlight: Establishing an Accurate Microhardness Testing Protocol for Craniofacial Tissues
Published on: April 26, 2024
07:42Quasistatic Mechanical Testing for Computer-Aided Design and Manufacturing Occlusal Veneers Cemented to Milled Dentin Analog Material
Published on: December 20, 2024