|
| ORIGINAL RESEARCH |
 |
|
|
| 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
Preeti Marda1, Shobha Prakash1, CG Devaraj1, S Vastardis2
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
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None  | Check |
DOI: 10.4103/0970-9290.100420
|
|
|
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]* |
|
 |
|
Users online:
