Comparative evaluation of efficiency of different file systems in terms of remaining dentin thickness using cone-beam computed tomography: An in vitro study

Background: Endodontic therapy treats inside of the tooth and its success is based upon the triad of thorough canal debridement, effective disinfection, and obturation of the canal space. Thus, one of the most important steps is biomechanical preparation, which is the key stage of endodontic treatme...
Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Nidhi Rathi Chaudhary [verfasserIn] Deepti Jawa Singh [verfasserIn] Rani Somani [verfasserIn] Shipra Jaidka [verfasserIn]

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2018

Schlagwörter:	Cone-beam computed tomography Mtwo Protaper WaveOne

Übergeordnetes Werk:	In: Contemporary Clinical Dentistry - Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications, 2010, 9(2018), 3, Seite 367-371
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:9 ; year:2018 ; number:3 ; pages:367-371

Links:	Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Journal toc Journal toc

DOI / URN:	10.4103/ccd.ccd_72_18

Katalog-ID:	DOAJ009814906

Internformat


LEADER	01000caa a22002652 4500
001	DOAJ009814906
003	DE-627
005	20230310022512.0
007	cr uuu---uuuuu
008	230225s2018 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.4103/ccd.ccd_72_18 \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)DOAJ009814906
035			\|a (DE-599)DOAJ6d2da3ec194a41b5949477c0b9347fef
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng
050		0	\|a RK1-715
100	0		\|a Nidhi Rathi Chaudhary \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a Comparative evaluation of efficiency of different file systems in terms of remaining dentin thickness using cone-beam computed tomography: An in vitro study
264		1	\|c 2018
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a Computermedien \|b c \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Online-Ressource \|b cr \|2 rdacarrier
520			\|a Background: Endodontic therapy treats inside of the tooth and its success is based upon the triad of thorough canal debridement, effective disinfection, and obturation of the canal space. Thus, one of the most important steps is biomechanical preparation, which is the key stage of endodontic treatment with a predictive success factor if performed properly. Aim: The aim of the study is to evaluate and compare the cleaning efficiency of different file systems in terms of remaining dentin thickness. Materials and Methods: A total of thirty permanent extracted anterior teeth were taken for the study and was divided into three groups – Group I – Manual Protapers, Group II – Rotary Mtwo, and Group III – Reciprocating WaveOne file systems. Pre-cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan was taken followed by biomechanical preparation by the respective file groups. Post-CBCT scan was taken and the pre- and post-CBCT scans were compared for remaining dentin thickness. Data were analyzed with ANOVA (P = 0.001). Statistical Analysis Used: ANOVA test was used in this study. Results: Protaper showed minimum reduction in dentin thickness followed by Mtwo and WaveOne showed maximum reduction in dentin thickness, but the intergroup comparison was found to be highly insignificant. Conclusion: WaveOne is a highly recommended rotary endodontic instrument which does not cause significant lowering in remaining dentin thickness after biomechanical preparation.
650		4	\|a Cone-beam computed tomography
650		4	\|a Mtwo
650		4	\|a Protaper
650		4	\|a WaveOne
653		0	\|a Dentistry
700	0		\|a Deepti Jawa Singh \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Rani Somani \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Shipra Jaidka \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
773	0	8	\|i In \|t Contemporary Clinical Dentistry \|d Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications, 2010 \|g 9(2018), 3, Seite 367-371 \|w (DE-627)64057355X \|w (DE-600)2582352-8 \|x 09762361 \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:9 \|g year:2018 \|g number:3 \|g pages:367-371
856	4	0	\|u https://doi.org/10.4103/ccd.ccd_72_18 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u https://doaj.org/article/6d2da3ec194a41b5949477c0b9347fef \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u http://www.contempclindent.org/article.asp?issn=0976-237X;year=2018;volume=9;issue=3;spage=367;epage=371;aulast=Chaudhary \|z kostenfrei
856	4	2	\|u https://doaj.org/toc/0976-237X \|y Journal toc \|z kostenfrei
856	4	2	\|u https://doaj.org/toc/0976-2361 \|y Journal toc \|z kostenfrei
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
912			\|a SYSFLAG_A
912			\|a GBV_DOAJ
912			\|a GBV_ILN_11
912			\|a GBV_ILN_20
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_23
912			\|a GBV_ILN_24
912			\|a GBV_ILN_39
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_60
912			\|a GBV_ILN_62
912			\|a GBV_ILN_63
912			\|a GBV_ILN_65
912			\|a GBV_ILN_69
912			\|a GBV_ILN_73
912			\|a GBV_ILN_74
912			\|a GBV_ILN_95
912			\|a GBV_ILN_105
912			\|a GBV_ILN_110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_151
912			\|a GBV_ILN_161
912			\|a GBV_ILN_170
912			\|a GBV_ILN_206
912			\|a GBV_ILN_213
912			\|a GBV_ILN_230
912			\|a GBV_ILN_285
912			\|a GBV_ILN_293
912			\|a GBV_ILN_602
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2003
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2014
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4012
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4037
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4125
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4126
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4249
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4305
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4306
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4307
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4313
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4322
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4323
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4324
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4325
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4338
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4367
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4700
951			\|a AR
952			\|d 9 \|j 2018 \|e 3 \|h 367-371

Indexfelder

author_variant	n r c nrc d j s djs r s rs s j sj
matchkey_str	article:09762361:2018----::oprtveautooefcecodfeetieytmitrsfeanndnitikessncnb
hierarchy_sort_str	2018
callnumber-subject-code	RK
publishDate	2018
allfields	10.4103/ccd.ccd_72_18 doi (DE-627)DOAJ009814906 (DE-599)DOAJ6d2da3ec194a41b5949477c0b9347fef DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RK1-715 Nidhi Rathi Chaudhary verfasserin aut Comparative evaluation of efficiency of different file systems in terms of remaining dentin thickness using cone-beam computed tomography: An in vitro study 2018 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Background: Endodontic therapy treats inside of the tooth and its success is based upon the triad of thorough canal debridement, effective disinfection, and obturation of the canal space. Thus, one of the most important steps is biomechanical preparation, which is the key stage of endodontic treatment with a predictive success factor if performed properly. Aim: The aim of the study is to evaluate and compare the cleaning efficiency of different file systems in terms of remaining dentin thickness. Materials and Methods: A total of thirty permanent extracted anterior teeth were taken for the study and was divided into three groups – Group I – Manual Protapers, Group II – Rotary Mtwo, and Group III – Reciprocating WaveOne file systems. Pre-cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan was taken followed by biomechanical preparation by the respective file groups. Post-CBCT scan was taken and the pre- and post-CBCT scans were compared for remaining dentin thickness. Data were analyzed with ANOVA (P = 0.001). Statistical Analysis Used: ANOVA test was used in this study. Results: Protaper showed minimum reduction in dentin thickness followed by Mtwo and WaveOne showed maximum reduction in dentin thickness, but the intergroup comparison was found to be highly insignificant. Conclusion: WaveOne is a highly recommended rotary endodontic instrument which does not cause significant lowering in remaining dentin thickness after biomechanical preparation. Cone-beam computed tomography Mtwo Protaper WaveOne Dentistry Deepti Jawa Singh verfasserin aut Rani Somani verfasserin aut Shipra Jaidka verfasserin aut In Contemporary Clinical Dentistry Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications, 2010 9(2018), 3, Seite 367-371 (DE-627)64057355X (DE-600)2582352-8 09762361 nnns volume:9 year:2018 number:3 pages:367-371 https://doi.org/10.4103/ccd.ccd_72_18 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/6d2da3ec194a41b5949477c0b9347fef kostenfrei http://www.contempclindent.org/article.asp?issn=0976-237X;year=2018;volume=9;issue=3;spage=367;epage=371;aulast=Chaudhary kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/0976-237X Journal toc kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/0976-2361 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 9 2018 3 367-371
spelling	10.4103/ccd.ccd_72_18 doi (DE-627)DOAJ009814906 (DE-599)DOAJ6d2da3ec194a41b5949477c0b9347fef DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RK1-715 Nidhi Rathi Chaudhary verfasserin aut Comparative evaluation of efficiency of different file systems in terms of remaining dentin thickness using cone-beam computed tomography: An in vitro study 2018 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Background: Endodontic therapy treats inside of the tooth and its success is based upon the triad of thorough canal debridement, effective disinfection, and obturation of the canal space. Thus, one of the most important steps is biomechanical preparation, which is the key stage of endodontic treatment with a predictive success factor if performed properly. Aim: The aim of the study is to evaluate and compare the cleaning efficiency of different file systems in terms of remaining dentin thickness. Materials and Methods: A total of thirty permanent extracted anterior teeth were taken for the study and was divided into three groups – Group I – Manual Protapers, Group II – Rotary Mtwo, and Group III – Reciprocating WaveOne file systems. Pre-cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan was taken followed by biomechanical preparation by the respective file groups. Post-CBCT scan was taken and the pre- and post-CBCT scans were compared for remaining dentin thickness. Data were analyzed with ANOVA (P = 0.001). Statistical Analysis Used: ANOVA test was used in this study. Results: Protaper showed minimum reduction in dentin thickness followed by Mtwo and WaveOne showed maximum reduction in dentin thickness, but the intergroup comparison was found to be highly insignificant. Conclusion: WaveOne is a highly recommended rotary endodontic instrument which does not cause significant lowering in remaining dentin thickness after biomechanical preparation. Cone-beam computed tomography Mtwo Protaper WaveOne Dentistry Deepti Jawa Singh verfasserin aut Rani Somani verfasserin aut Shipra Jaidka verfasserin aut In Contemporary Clinical Dentistry Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications, 2010 9(2018), 3, Seite 367-371 (DE-627)64057355X (DE-600)2582352-8 09762361 nnns volume:9 year:2018 number:3 pages:367-371 https://doi.org/10.4103/ccd.ccd_72_18 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/6d2da3ec194a41b5949477c0b9347fef kostenfrei http://www.contempclindent.org/article.asp?issn=0976-237X;year=2018;volume=9;issue=3;spage=367;epage=371;aulast=Chaudhary kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/0976-237X Journal toc kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/0976-2361 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 9 2018 3 367-371
allfields_unstemmed	10.4103/ccd.ccd_72_18 doi (DE-627)DOAJ009814906 (DE-599)DOAJ6d2da3ec194a41b5949477c0b9347fef DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RK1-715 Nidhi Rathi Chaudhary verfasserin aut Comparative evaluation of efficiency of different file systems in terms of remaining dentin thickness using cone-beam computed tomography: An in vitro study 2018 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Background: Endodontic therapy treats inside of the tooth and its success is based upon the triad of thorough canal debridement, effective disinfection, and obturation of the canal space. Thus, one of the most important steps is biomechanical preparation, which is the key stage of endodontic treatment with a predictive success factor if performed properly. Aim: The aim of the study is to evaluate and compare the cleaning efficiency of different file systems in terms of remaining dentin thickness. Materials and Methods: A total of thirty permanent extracted anterior teeth were taken for the study and was divided into three groups – Group I – Manual Protapers, Group II – Rotary Mtwo, and Group III – Reciprocating WaveOne file systems. Pre-cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan was taken followed by biomechanical preparation by the respective file groups. Post-CBCT scan was taken and the pre- and post-CBCT scans were compared for remaining dentin thickness. Data were analyzed with ANOVA (P = 0.001). Statistical Analysis Used: ANOVA test was used in this study. Results: Protaper showed minimum reduction in dentin thickness followed by Mtwo and WaveOne showed maximum reduction in dentin thickness, but the intergroup comparison was found to be highly insignificant. Conclusion: WaveOne is a highly recommended rotary endodontic instrument which does not cause significant lowering in remaining dentin thickness after biomechanical preparation. Cone-beam computed tomography Mtwo Protaper WaveOne Dentistry Deepti Jawa Singh verfasserin aut Rani Somani verfasserin aut Shipra Jaidka verfasserin aut In Contemporary Clinical Dentistry Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications, 2010 9(2018), 3, Seite 367-371 (DE-627)64057355X (DE-600)2582352-8 09762361 nnns volume:9 year:2018 number:3 pages:367-371 https://doi.org/10.4103/ccd.ccd_72_18 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/6d2da3ec194a41b5949477c0b9347fef kostenfrei http://www.contempclindent.org/article.asp?issn=0976-237X;year=2018;volume=9;issue=3;spage=367;epage=371;aulast=Chaudhary kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/0976-237X Journal toc kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/0976-2361 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 9 2018 3 367-371
allfieldsGer	10.4103/ccd.ccd_72_18 doi (DE-627)DOAJ009814906 (DE-599)DOAJ6d2da3ec194a41b5949477c0b9347fef DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RK1-715 Nidhi Rathi Chaudhary verfasserin aut Comparative evaluation of efficiency of different file systems in terms of remaining dentin thickness using cone-beam computed tomography: An in vitro study 2018 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Background: Endodontic therapy treats inside of the tooth and its success is based upon the triad of thorough canal debridement, effective disinfection, and obturation of the canal space. Thus, one of the most important steps is biomechanical preparation, which is the key stage of endodontic treatment with a predictive success factor if performed properly. Aim: The aim of the study is to evaluate and compare the cleaning efficiency of different file systems in terms of remaining dentin thickness. Materials and Methods: A total of thirty permanent extracted anterior teeth were taken for the study and was divided into three groups – Group I – Manual Protapers, Group II – Rotary Mtwo, and Group III – Reciprocating WaveOne file systems. Pre-cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan was taken followed by biomechanical preparation by the respective file groups. Post-CBCT scan was taken and the pre- and post-CBCT scans were compared for remaining dentin thickness. Data were analyzed with ANOVA (P = 0.001). Statistical Analysis Used: ANOVA test was used in this study. Results: Protaper showed minimum reduction in dentin thickness followed by Mtwo and WaveOne showed maximum reduction in dentin thickness, but the intergroup comparison was found to be highly insignificant. Conclusion: WaveOne is a highly recommended rotary endodontic instrument which does not cause significant lowering in remaining dentin thickness after biomechanical preparation. Cone-beam computed tomography Mtwo Protaper WaveOne Dentistry Deepti Jawa Singh verfasserin aut Rani Somani verfasserin aut Shipra Jaidka verfasserin aut In Contemporary Clinical Dentistry Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications, 2010 9(2018), 3, Seite 367-371 (DE-627)64057355X (DE-600)2582352-8 09762361 nnns volume:9 year:2018 number:3 pages:367-371 https://doi.org/10.4103/ccd.ccd_72_18 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/6d2da3ec194a41b5949477c0b9347fef kostenfrei http://www.contempclindent.org/article.asp?issn=0976-237X;year=2018;volume=9;issue=3;spage=367;epage=371;aulast=Chaudhary kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/0976-237X Journal toc kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/0976-2361 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 9 2018 3 367-371
allfieldsSound	10.4103/ccd.ccd_72_18 doi (DE-627)DOAJ009814906 (DE-599)DOAJ6d2da3ec194a41b5949477c0b9347fef DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RK1-715 Nidhi Rathi Chaudhary verfasserin aut Comparative evaluation of efficiency of different file systems in terms of remaining dentin thickness using cone-beam computed tomography: An in vitro study 2018 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Background: Endodontic therapy treats inside of the tooth and its success is based upon the triad of thorough canal debridement, effective disinfection, and obturation of the canal space. Thus, one of the most important steps is biomechanical preparation, which is the key stage of endodontic treatment with a predictive success factor if performed properly. Aim: The aim of the study is to evaluate and compare the cleaning efficiency of different file systems in terms of remaining dentin thickness. Materials and Methods: A total of thirty permanent extracted anterior teeth were taken for the study and was divided into three groups – Group I – Manual Protapers, Group II – Rotary Mtwo, and Group III – Reciprocating WaveOne file systems. Pre-cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan was taken followed by biomechanical preparation by the respective file groups. Post-CBCT scan was taken and the pre- and post-CBCT scans were compared for remaining dentin thickness. Data were analyzed with ANOVA (P = 0.001). Statistical Analysis Used: ANOVA test was used in this study. Results: Protaper showed minimum reduction in dentin thickness followed by Mtwo and WaveOne showed maximum reduction in dentin thickness, but the intergroup comparison was found to be highly insignificant. Conclusion: WaveOne is a highly recommended rotary endodontic instrument which does not cause significant lowering in remaining dentin thickness after biomechanical preparation. Cone-beam computed tomography Mtwo Protaper WaveOne Dentistry Deepti Jawa Singh verfasserin aut Rani Somani verfasserin aut Shipra Jaidka verfasserin aut In Contemporary Clinical Dentistry Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications, 2010 9(2018), 3, Seite 367-371 (DE-627)64057355X (DE-600)2582352-8 09762361 nnns volume:9 year:2018 number:3 pages:367-371 https://doi.org/10.4103/ccd.ccd_72_18 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/6d2da3ec194a41b5949477c0b9347fef kostenfrei http://www.contempclindent.org/article.asp?issn=0976-237X;year=2018;volume=9;issue=3;spage=367;epage=371;aulast=Chaudhary kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/0976-237X Journal toc kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/0976-2361 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 9 2018 3 367-371
language	English
source	In Contemporary Clinical Dentistry 9(2018), 3, Seite 367-371 volume:9 year:2018 number:3 pages:367-371
sourceStr	In Contemporary Clinical Dentistry 9(2018), 3, Seite 367-371 volume:9 year:2018 number:3 pages:367-371
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	Cone-beam computed tomography Mtwo Protaper WaveOne Dentistry
isfreeaccess_bool	true
container_title	Contemporary Clinical Dentistry
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Nidhi Rathi Chaudhary @@aut@@ Deepti Jawa Singh @@aut@@ Rani Somani @@aut@@ Shipra Jaidka @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2018-01-01T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	64057355X
id	DOAJ009814906
language_de	englisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ009814906</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230310022512.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230225s2018 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.4103/ccd.ccd_72_18</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ009814906</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ6d2da3ec194a41b5949477c0b9347fef</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">RK1-715</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Nidhi Rathi Chaudhary</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Comparative evaluation of efficiency of different file systems in terms of remaining dentin thickness using cone-beam computed tomography: An in vitro study</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2018</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background: Endodontic therapy treats inside of the tooth and its success is based upon the triad of thorough canal debridement, effective disinfection, and obturation of the canal space. Thus, one of the most important steps is biomechanical preparation, which is the key stage of endodontic treatment with a predictive success factor if performed properly. Aim: The aim of the study is to evaluate and compare the cleaning efficiency of different file systems in terms of remaining dentin thickness. Materials and Methods: A total of thirty permanent extracted anterior teeth were taken for the study and was divided into three groups – Group I – Manual Protapers, Group II – Rotary Mtwo, and Group III – Reciprocating WaveOne file systems. Pre-cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan was taken followed by biomechanical preparation by the respective file groups. Post-CBCT scan was taken and the pre- and post-CBCT scans were compared for remaining dentin thickness. Data were analyzed with ANOVA (P = 0.001). Statistical Analysis Used: ANOVA test was used in this study. Results: Protaper showed minimum reduction in dentin thickness followed by Mtwo and WaveOne showed maximum reduction in dentin thickness, but the intergroup comparison was found to be highly insignificant. Conclusion: WaveOne is a highly recommended rotary endodontic instrument which does not cause significant lowering in remaining dentin thickness after biomechanical preparation.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Cone-beam computed tomography</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Mtwo</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Protaper</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">WaveOne</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Dentistry</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Deepti Jawa Singh</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Rani Somani</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Shipra Jaidka</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Contemporary Clinical Dentistry</subfield><subfield code="d">Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications, 2010</subfield><subfield code="g">9(2018), 3, Seite 367-371</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)64057355X</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2582352-8</subfield><subfield code="x">09762361</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:9</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2018</subfield><subfield code="g">number:3</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:367-371</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.4103/ccd.ccd_72_18</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/6d2da3ec194a41b5949477c0b9347fef</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://www.contempclindent.org/article.asp?issn=0976-237X;year=2018;volume=9;issue=3;spage=367;epage=371;aulast=Chaudhary</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/0976-237X</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/0976-2361</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">9</subfield><subfield code="j">2018</subfield><subfield code="e">3</subfield><subfield code="h">367-371</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
callnumber-first	R - Medicine
author	Nidhi Rathi Chaudhary
spellingShingle	Nidhi Rathi Chaudhary misc RK1-715 misc Cone-beam computed tomography misc Mtwo misc Protaper misc WaveOne misc Dentistry Comparative evaluation of efficiency of different file systems in terms of remaining dentin thickness using cone-beam computed tomography: An in vitro study
authorStr	Nidhi Rathi Chaudhary
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)64057355X
format	electronic Article
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut aut aut aut
collection	DOAJ
remote_str	true
callnumber-label	RK1-715
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	09762361
topic_title	RK1-715 Comparative evaluation of efficiency of different file systems in terms of remaining dentin thickness using cone-beam computed tomography: An in vitro study Cone-beam computed tomography Mtwo Protaper WaveOne
topic	misc RK1-715 misc Cone-beam computed tomography misc Mtwo misc Protaper misc WaveOne misc Dentistry
topic_unstemmed	misc RK1-715 misc Cone-beam computed tomography misc Mtwo misc Protaper misc WaveOne misc Dentistry
topic_browse	misc RK1-715 misc Cone-beam computed tomography misc Mtwo misc Protaper misc WaveOne misc Dentistry
format_facet	Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	cr
hierarchy_parent_title	Contemporary Clinical Dentistry
hierarchy_parent_id	64057355X
hierarchy_top_title	Contemporary Clinical Dentistry
isfreeaccess_txt	true
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)64057355X (DE-600)2582352-8
title	Comparative evaluation of efficiency of different file systems in terms of remaining dentin thickness using cone-beam computed tomography: An in vitro study
ctrlnum	(DE-627)DOAJ009814906 (DE-599)DOAJ6d2da3ec194a41b5949477c0b9347fef
title_full	Comparative evaluation of efficiency of different file systems in terms of remaining dentin thickness using cone-beam computed tomography: An in vitro study
author_sort	Nidhi Rathi Chaudhary
journal	Contemporary Clinical Dentistry
journalStr	Contemporary Clinical Dentistry
callnumber-first-code	R
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	true
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2018
contenttype_str_mv	txt
container_start_page	367
author_browse	Nidhi Rathi Chaudhary Deepti Jawa Singh Rani Somani Shipra Jaidka
container_volume	9
class	RK1-715
format_se	Elektronische Aufsätze
author-letter	Nidhi Rathi Chaudhary
doi_str_mv	10.4103/ccd.ccd_72_18
author2-role	verfasserin
title_sort	comparative evaluation of efficiency of different file systems in terms of remaining dentin thickness using cone-beam computed tomography: an in vitro study
callnumber	RK1-715
title_auth	Comparative evaluation of efficiency of different file systems in terms of remaining dentin thickness using cone-beam computed tomography: An in vitro study
abstract	Background: Endodontic therapy treats inside of the tooth and its success is based upon the triad of thorough canal debridement, effective disinfection, and obturation of the canal space. Thus, one of the most important steps is biomechanical preparation, which is the key stage of endodontic treatment with a predictive success factor if performed properly. Aim: The aim of the study is to evaluate and compare the cleaning efficiency of different file systems in terms of remaining dentin thickness. Materials and Methods: A total of thirty permanent extracted anterior teeth were taken for the study and was divided into three groups – Group I – Manual Protapers, Group II – Rotary Mtwo, and Group III – Reciprocating WaveOne file systems. Pre-cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan was taken followed by biomechanical preparation by the respective file groups. Post-CBCT scan was taken and the pre- and post-CBCT scans were compared for remaining dentin thickness. Data were analyzed with ANOVA (P = 0.001). Statistical Analysis Used: ANOVA test was used in this study. Results: Protaper showed minimum reduction in dentin thickness followed by Mtwo and WaveOne showed maximum reduction in dentin thickness, but the intergroup comparison was found to be highly insignificant. Conclusion: WaveOne is a highly recommended rotary endodontic instrument which does not cause significant lowering in remaining dentin thickness after biomechanical preparation.
abstractGer	Background: Endodontic therapy treats inside of the tooth and its success is based upon the triad of thorough canal debridement, effective disinfection, and obturation of the canal space. Thus, one of the most important steps is biomechanical preparation, which is the key stage of endodontic treatment with a predictive success factor if performed properly. Aim: The aim of the study is to evaluate and compare the cleaning efficiency of different file systems in terms of remaining dentin thickness. Materials and Methods: A total of thirty permanent extracted anterior teeth were taken for the study and was divided into three groups – Group I – Manual Protapers, Group II – Rotary Mtwo, and Group III – Reciprocating WaveOne file systems. Pre-cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan was taken followed by biomechanical preparation by the respective file groups. Post-CBCT scan was taken and the pre- and post-CBCT scans were compared for remaining dentin thickness. Data were analyzed with ANOVA (P = 0.001). Statistical Analysis Used: ANOVA test was used in this study. Results: Protaper showed minimum reduction in dentin thickness followed by Mtwo and WaveOne showed maximum reduction in dentin thickness, but the intergroup comparison was found to be highly insignificant. Conclusion: WaveOne is a highly recommended rotary endodontic instrument which does not cause significant lowering in remaining dentin thickness after biomechanical preparation.
abstract_unstemmed	Background: Endodontic therapy treats inside of the tooth and its success is based upon the triad of thorough canal debridement, effective disinfection, and obturation of the canal space. Thus, one of the most important steps is biomechanical preparation, which is the key stage of endodontic treatment with a predictive success factor if performed properly. Aim: The aim of the study is to evaluate and compare the cleaning efficiency of different file systems in terms of remaining dentin thickness. Materials and Methods: A total of thirty permanent extracted anterior teeth were taken for the study and was divided into three groups – Group I – Manual Protapers, Group II – Rotary Mtwo, and Group III – Reciprocating WaveOne file systems. Pre-cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan was taken followed by biomechanical preparation by the respective file groups. Post-CBCT scan was taken and the pre- and post-CBCT scans were compared for remaining dentin thickness. Data were analyzed with ANOVA (P = 0.001). Statistical Analysis Used: ANOVA test was used in this study. Results: Protaper showed minimum reduction in dentin thickness followed by Mtwo and WaveOne showed maximum reduction in dentin thickness, but the intergroup comparison was found to be highly insignificant. Conclusion: WaveOne is a highly recommended rotary endodontic instrument which does not cause significant lowering in remaining dentin thickness after biomechanical preparation.
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700
container_issue	3
title_short	Comparative evaluation of efficiency of different file systems in terms of remaining dentin thickness using cone-beam computed tomography: An in vitro study
url	https://doi.org/10.4103/ccd.ccd_72_18 https://doaj.org/article/6d2da3ec194a41b5949477c0b9347fef http://www.contempclindent.org/article.asp?issn=0976-237X;year=2018;volume=9;issue=3;spage=367;epage=371;aulast=Chaudhary https://doaj.org/toc/0976-237X https://doaj.org/toc/0976-2361
remote_bool	true
author2	Deepti Jawa Singh Rani Somani Shipra Jaidka
author2Str	Deepti Jawa Singh Rani Somani Shipra Jaidka
ppnlink	64057355X
callnumber-subject	RK - Dentistry
mediatype_str_mv	c
isOA_txt	true
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.4103/ccd.ccd_72_18
callnumber-a	RK1-715
up_date	2024-07-04T01:09:21.025Z
_version_	1803608770245296128
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ009814906</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230310022512.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230225s2018 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.4103/ccd.ccd_72_18</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ009814906</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ6d2da3ec194a41b5949477c0b9347fef</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">RK1-715</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Nidhi Rathi Chaudhary</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Comparative evaluation of efficiency of different file systems in terms of remaining dentin thickness using cone-beam computed tomography: An in vitro study</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2018</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background: Endodontic therapy treats inside of the tooth and its success is based upon the triad of thorough canal debridement, effective disinfection, and obturation of the canal space. Thus, one of the most important steps is biomechanical preparation, which is the key stage of endodontic treatment with a predictive success factor if performed properly. Aim: The aim of the study is to evaluate and compare the cleaning efficiency of different file systems in terms of remaining dentin thickness. Materials and Methods: A total of thirty permanent extracted anterior teeth were taken for the study and was divided into three groups – Group I – Manual Protapers, Group II – Rotary Mtwo, and Group III – Reciprocating WaveOne file systems. Pre-cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan was taken followed by biomechanical preparation by the respective file groups. Post-CBCT scan was taken and the pre- and post-CBCT scans were compared for remaining dentin thickness. Data were analyzed with ANOVA (P = 0.001). Statistical Analysis Used: ANOVA test was used in this study. Results: Protaper showed minimum reduction in dentin thickness followed by Mtwo and WaveOne showed maximum reduction in dentin thickness, but the intergroup comparison was found to be highly insignificant. Conclusion: WaveOne is a highly recommended rotary endodontic instrument which does not cause significant lowering in remaining dentin thickness after biomechanical preparation.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Cone-beam computed tomography</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Mtwo</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Protaper</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">WaveOne</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Dentistry</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Deepti Jawa Singh</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Rani Somani</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Shipra Jaidka</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Contemporary Clinical Dentistry</subfield><subfield code="d">Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications, 2010</subfield><subfield code="g">9(2018), 3, Seite 367-371</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)64057355X</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2582352-8</subfield><subfield code="x">09762361</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:9</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2018</subfield><subfield code="g">number:3</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:367-371</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.4103/ccd.ccd_72_18</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/6d2da3ec194a41b5949477c0b9347fef</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://www.contempclindent.org/article.asp?issn=0976-237X;year=2018;volume=9;issue=3;spage=367;epage=371;aulast=Chaudhary</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/0976-237X</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/0976-2361</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">9</subfield><subfield code="j">2018</subfield><subfield code="e">3</subfield><subfield code="h">367-371</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.39979

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

Comparative evaluation of efficiency of different file systems in terms of remaining dentin thickness using cone-beam computed tomography: An in vitro study

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?