METHODS: This article was divided into the following parts: Part 1 Surface roughness and substance loss: an in vitro study, which involves intact extracted teeth sectioned and treated using a piezoelectric ultrasonic device (PM200 EMS Piezon, Switzerland) with a conventional scaler tip (FS-407) and a Perio Slim (PS) scaler tip (Perio Slim DS-016A). All sectioned samples for tooth surface roughness (n = 20) and tooth substance loss (n = 46) analyses were measured and compared using a 3D surface texture analyser and scanning electron microscope (SEM) respectively, at baseline and following scaling. Part 2 Pain Perception: a clinical study, which was a split mouth study design including 30 participants with gingivitis and/or mild chronic periodontitis; treated with supra-gingival scaling from teeth #13 to #23. Subjects were randomised to group A or group B. Group A was treated first with PS scaler tips, whereas group B was treated first with conventional scaler tips. Pain perception was recorded using the visual analogue scale (VAS).
RESULTS: In vitro study: both scaler tips caused significant reduction in root substance roughness after scaling (p 0.05) was observed. The PS scaler tip caused statistically significantly less root substance loss (p tooth was tooth substance loss compared to a wider scaler tip design. In the clinical study, less pain was observed compared than a wide (conventional) scaler tip design.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The courses of the mandibular canal in 202 cone-beam computed tomography scanned images of healthy Malaysians were evaluated, and trifid mandibular canal (TMC) when present, were recorded and studied in detail by categorizing them to a new classification (comprising of 12 types). The diameter and length of canals were also measured, and their shape determined.
RESULTS: Trifid mandibular canals were observed in 12 (5.9%) subjects or 16 (4.0%) hemi-mandibles. There were 10 obvious categories out the 12 types of TMCs listed. All TMCs (except one) were observed in patients older than 30 years. The prevalence according to ethnicity was 6 in Malays, 5 in Chinese and 1 in Indian. Four (33.3%) patients had bilateral TMCs, which was not seen in the Indian subject. More than half (56.3%) of the accessory canals were located above the main mandibular canal. Their mean diameter was 1.32 mm and 1.26 mm for the first and second accessory canal, and the corresponding lengths were 20.42 mm and 21.60 mm, respectively. Most (62.5%) canals had irregularly shaped lumen; there were more irregularly shaped canals in the second accessory canal than the first branch. None of the second accessory canal was oval (in shape).
CONCLUSIONS: This new classification can be applied for the variations in the branching pattern, length and shape of TMCs for better clinical description.
Materials and Methods: In this in-vitro study, a total of 48 single-rooted permanent human teeth were decoronated, and the roots were treated endodontically. Following post space preparation, the sample was divided into four groups (n= 12 each) based on the types of post and cement. Two different types of post [GC everStick®POST (ES) and Parapost® Fiber LuxTM (PF)], and two different types of cement [G-CEMTM (G), and RelyXTM Unicem (R)] were used according to the manufacturer's instructions. All roots were sectioned at the coronal and middle thirds with a thickness of 3±0.1mm. The Push-out bond strength (PBS) test was performed using a universal testing machine at a cross-head speed of 0.5mm/ min. The bond strength values were recorded, and the data were analyzed using the SPSS program. Apart from descriptive statistics, three-way ANOVA was used for the interaction of the independent variables (post, cement, and root level). For differences between the groups, the Mann-Whitney U test was used. A P-value of less than 0.05 was considered significant for all analyses.
Results: Push-out bond strength of samples at the middle level (11.38±10.31 MPa), with PF posts (11.18±9.98 MPa), and of those luted with RelyXTM Unicem cement (13.26±8.73 MPa) was higher than that of their counterparts. The PBS means of RelyXTM Unicem cement at both root levels were much higher than PBS means of G-CEMTM cement. Three-way ANOVA test revealed a significant effect for each variable with a higher effect of cement (Sum of Squares= 1310.690; P< 0.001). No significant difference (P= 0.153) was found between the coronal and middle parts and between ES and PF posts (P= 0.058). However, a highly significant difference (P< 0.001) was found between RelyXTM Unicem and G-CEMTM cements.
Conclusion: The type of cement had a significant effect on push-out bond strength with RelyXTM Unicem which had higher values than G-CEMTM. However, the type of post and root level had no significant effect on PBS, although Parapost® Fiber LuxTM and middle root level had higher values than their counterparts.