Conclusions : The probability for success for EMS proved to be significantly greater than the probability for success for RES , providing best available evidence on the influence of cavity preparation with ultrasonic tips and /or SuperEBA ( Keystone Industries , Gibbstown , NJ ) , IRM ( Dentsply Sirona , York , PA ) , MTA , or silicate cements as root‐end filling material instead of a shallow cavity preparation and placement of a resin‐based material .
HIGHLIGHTSEndodontic microsurgery ( EMS ) with the use of high‐magnification ultrasonic root‐end preparation and root‐end filling with SuperEBA , IRM , MTA , or other calcium silicate cements has a high probability of success .
Resin‐based endodontic surgery with the use of high‐magnification preparation of a shallow concave root‐end cavity with bonded resin‐based root‐end filling material performed less favorably than EMS
Introduction : The aim of the present study was to investigate the influence of root‐end preparation and filling material on endodontic surgery outcome .
A prospective clinical study of polycarboxylate cement in periapical surgery
Objective : To evaluate the clinical efficacy of polycarboxylate cement as retro grade filling material . Design : A prospect i ve clinical study was made of 25 patients subjected to periapical surgery with ultrasound and magnifying loupes , in which polycarboxylate cement was used as retro grade filling material . Measurements were made of the area and diameter of the lesions pre- and postoperatively , and 6 and 12 months after the operation . The apical resection and retro grade filling areas were also measured , and the prognosis following surgery was recorded . Results : A total of 23 patients with 31 apicoectomized teeth were studied ( 2 patients being lost to follow-up ) . The mean area of the periapical lesions before surgery was 52.25 mm2 , with a mean major diameter of 6.1 mm and a mean lesser diameter of 4.8 mm . The success rate after 12 months was 54.7 % , according to the criteria of Von Arx and Kurt . The prognosis was poorer in females , in larger lesions , and in cases with larger retro grade filling areas . Conclusions : Polycarboxylate cement offers good results , with important bone regeneration after periapical surgery . Key words : Periapical surgery , endodontic treatment , polycarboxylate cement
Conclusions : The probability for success for EMS proved to be significantly greater than the probability for success for RES , providing best available evidence on the influence of cavity preparation with ultrasonic tips and /or SuperEBA ( Keystone Industries , Gibbstown , NJ ) , IRM ( Dentsply Sirona , York , PA ) , MTA , or silicate cements as root‐end filling material instead of a shallow cavity preparation and placement of a resin‐based material .
HIGHLIGHTSEndodontic microsurgery ( EMS ) with the use of high‐magnification ultrasonic root‐end preparation and root‐end filling with SuperEBA , IRM , MTA , or other calcium silicate cements has a high probability of success .
Resin‐based endodontic surgery with the use of high‐magnification preparation of a shallow concave root‐end cavity with bonded resin‐based root‐end filling material performed less favorably than EMS
Introduction : The aim of the present study was to investigate the influence of root‐end preparation and filling material on endodontic surgery outcome .