Search

The main objective of this in vitro study was to evaluate the effects of the operator's experience level and pre-flaring on the accuracy of the results of three different brands of a new generation of root canal measuring devices, as well as the comparison among them. Extracted human teeth were prepared and then actual length and electronic length measurements were made by three different operators according to a double-blind technique. Three different operators performed electronic measurements on each specimen separately with three different electronic root canal measuring devices using in vitro models. Measurements were repeated by all operators after the pre-flaring. Taking the clinical tolerance of +/- 0.5 mm into account, there was no statistically significant difference between the accuracy of the instruments (P > 0.01). However, the results obtained from the Bingo electronic apex locator in pre-flared canals by the beginner operator were statistically significant (P < 0.01). All of the instruments had a clinically acceptable result at the tolerance of +/- 0.5 mm. If the instruments are used in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions, experience with electronic root canal measurement is not essential. However, the operator has to be more careful when working on pre-flared canals.

Fluoride release from six light-activated restorative materials, including two resinmodified glass-ionomers, two composites, and two compomers, was evaluated and compared with one conventional acid-based glass-ionomer cement. The amount and rate of release varied among the tested materials. Both resin-modified glass-ionomers and the conventional acid-base glass-ionomer cements released more fluoride then the composites and compomers (p < 0.05). Additionally, composite materials released less fluoride than compomer materials (p < 0.05). Release of fluoride by the tested materials showed a significant decrease after all the tested time intervals.