Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Scanning electron microscopic evaluation of root-end preparations

M C Gorman1, H R Steiman, A H Gartner

  • 1Department of Endodontics, University of Detroit Mercy, School of Dentistry, Michigan, USA.

Journal of Endodontics
|March 1, 1995
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Comparison of distortion and separation utilizing profile and Pow-R nickel-titanium rotary files.

Journal of endodontics·2002
Same author

A comparative evaluation of three root-end filling materials: an in vitro leakage study using Prevotella nigrescens.

Journal of endodontics·2001
Same author

Comparison of nickel-titanium file distortion using electric and air-driven handpieces.

Journal of endodontics·2001
Same author

Effect of rotational speed on nickel-titanium file distortion.

Journal of endodontics·2000
Same author

Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of digital imaging by using CCD and CMOS-APS sensors with E-speed film in the detection of periapical bony lesions.

Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics·2000
Same author

A standardized menu for Goal Attainment Scaling in the care of frail elders.

The Gerontologist·1998
Same journal

Clinical Outcome of Replanted Avulsed Anterior Teeth: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Journal of endodontics·2026
Same journal

Mahidol study 3: Post-operative Effect and Adverse Events of Regenerative Endodontic Procedures in Immature Permanent Teeth.

Journal of endodontics·2026
Same journal

Non-Surgical Management of Horizontal Root Fracture with Necrotic Apical Segment and Coronal Cervical Abfraction Using Mineral Trioxide Aggregate: Case Report.

Journal of endodontics·2026
Same journal

Identification of pain-related biomarkers and the associated potential molecular regulation mechanism in pulpitis by bioinformatics method.

Journal of endodontics·2026
Same journal

AI Prognostic Models in Endodontics: Scoping Review and Clinical Gap Analysis for Retreatment vs Microsurgery Decision Support.

Journal of endodontics·2026
Same journal

AI-based 3D measurement of root canal curvature from CBCT: Validation of an automated Schneider angle analysis.

Journal of endodontics·2026
See all related articles

Ultrasonic apical preparation significantly reduces smear layer and debris in root-end cavities. This technique, alone or with rotary instruments, offers a cleaner preparation compared to rotary instrumentation alone.

Area of Science:

  • Endodontics
  • Dental Materials Science

Background:

  • Root-end preparation is crucial for endodontic treatment success.
  • Traditional rotary instrumentation can leave significant smear layer and debris.
  • Ultrasonic instrumentation has emerged as a potential alternative or adjunct.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare the efficacy of ultrasonic instrumentation versus rotary instrumentation for root-end cavity preparation.
  • To evaluate the impact of these techniques on smear layer, debris, and preparation characteristics.

Main Methods:

  • 30 single-canaled human teeth underwent root-end preparation using three techniques: ultrasonic alone, ultrasonic with rotary, and rotary alone.
  • Specimens were analyzed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM).
  • Evaluated parameters included debris, smear layer, preparation smoothness, and uniformity.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • Ultrasonic techniques (alone or combined) resulted in significantly less smear layer than rotary alone.
  • Combined ultrasonic and rotary instrumentation yielded significantly less debris than rotary alone.
  • No significant differences in preparation smoothness or uniformity were observed between techniques.

Conclusions:

  • Ultrasonic apical preparation is effective in reducing smear layer and debris.
  • Combining ultrasonic and rotary instrumentation offers superior debris removal.
  • Ultrasonic techniques represent a valuable advancement in root-end preparation.