Indian Journal of Dental ResearchIndian Journal of Dental ResearchIndian Journal of Dental Research
HOME | ABOUT US | EDITORIAL BOARD | AHEAD OF PRINT | CURRENT ISSUE | ARCHIVES | INSTRUCTIONS | SUBSCRIBE | ADVERTISE | CONTACT
Indian Journal of Dental Research   Login   |  Users online:

Home Bookmark this page Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font size Increase font size         

 


 
ORIGINAL RESEARCH Table of Contents   
Year : 2012  |  Volume : 23  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 164-170
A comparison of root surface instrumentation using manual, ultrasonic and rotary instruments: An in vitro study using scanning electron microscopy


1 Department of Periodontics, College of Dental Sciences, Davangere, Karnataka, India
2 Louisiana State University School of Dentistry, New Orleans, USA

Correspondence Address:
Shobha Prakash
Department of Periodontics, College of Dental Sciences, Davangere, Karnataka
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0970-9290.100420

Rights and Permissions

Background: The commonly accepted idea concerning root planing is that excessive removal of cementum is not necessary for removal of endotoxins. The ideal instrument should enable the removal of all extraneous substances from the root surfaces, without causing any iatrogenic effects. Aim: To compare the remaining calculus, loss of tooth substance, and roughness of root surface after root planing with Gracey curette, ultrasonic instrument (Slimline® insert FSI-SLI-10S), and DesmoClean® rotary bur. Materials and Methods: The efficiency of calculus removal, the amount of lost tooth substance, and root surface roughness resulting from the use of hand curette, ultrasonic instrument, and rotary bur on 36 extracted mandibular incisors were examined by SEM. We used three indices to measure the changes: Remaining calculus index (RCI), Loss of tooth substance index (LTSI), and Roughness loss of tooth substance index (RLTSI). Twelve samples were treated with each instrument. The time required for instrumentation was also noted. Statistical Analysis: Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA was used for multiple group comparisons and the Mann-Whitney test for group-wise comparisons. Analysis was carried out with SPSS® software (version 13). Results and Conclusion: The RCI and LTSI showed nonsignificant differences between the three groups. RLTSI showed a significant difference between Slimline™ and hand curette as well as Slimline™ and Desmo-Clean™. Slimline™ showed the least mean scores for RCI, LTSI, and RLTSI. Thus, even though the difference was not statistically significant, Slimline™ insert was shown to be better than the other methods as assessed by the indices scores and the instrumentation time.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article

 
 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
  Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
  Reader Comments
  Email Alert *
  Add to My List *
 
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed11120    
    Printed310    
    Emailed16    
    PDF Downloaded439    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 12    

Recommend this journal