Periapical radiographs overestimate root canal wall thickness during post space preparation

Aim To evaluate differences between anatomic and radiographic measurements of root canal wall thickness (RCWT) after each root canal preparation stage during post placement.Methodology Twenty mandibular premolars with a single canal were decoronated and the roots embedded in resin using a teflon muffle. Roots were sectioned horizontally at a pre-established level and canals were prepared for post placement. Endodontic hand files were used for root canal preparation, followed by Gates Glidden drills and Peeso reamers. Standardized radiographs and photographs at pre-established measurement levels were taken before preparation, after root canal instrumentation, after Gates Glidden preparation and after Peeso enlargement. All images were digitized and RCWT at the mesial and distal walls measured (IMAGETOOL 3.0). Differences between radiographic and anatomic measurements were analysed with paired t-tests. ANOVA was used to compare the percentages of radiographic distortions.Results Regardless of the time-point evaluated, RCWT determined by radiographs were greater than the respective anatomic measurements (P < 0.05). The difference detected at each stage was similar and constant (P > 0.05).Conclusions Throughout preparation for post placement, radiographic images overestimated the RCWT by approximately 25%, regardless of the clinical stage evaluated.

Measurement of low-derivative surface lenses by two-laser holography with Bi12TiO20 crystals

Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)

Influence of microwave polymerization method and thickness on porosity of acrylic resin

Purpose: This study evaluated the influence of polymerization cycle and thickness of maxillary complete denture bases on the porosity of acrylic resin. Materials and Methods: Two heat-activated denture base resins - one conventional (Clássico) and one designed for microwave polymerization (Onda-Cryl) - were used. Four groups were established, according to polymerization cycles: A (Onda-Cryl, short microwave cycle), B (Onda-Cryl, long microwave cycle), C (Onda-Cryl, manufacturing microwave cycle), and T (Clássico, water bath). Porosity was evaluated for different thicknesses (2.0, 3.5, and 5.0 mm; thicknesses I, II, and III, respectively) by measurement of the specimen volume before and after its immersion in water. The percent porosity data were submitted to Kruskal-Wallis for comparison among the groups. Results: The Kruskal-Wallis test detected that the combinations of the different cycles and thicknesses showed significant differences, and the mean ranks of percent porosity showed differences only in the thinnest (2.0 mm) microwave-polymerized specimens (A = 53.55, B = 40.80, and C = 90.70). Thickness did not affect the results for cycle T (I = 96.15, II = 70.20, and III = 82.70), because porosity values were similar in the three thicknesses. Conclusions: Microwave polymerization cycles and the specimen thickness of acrylic resin influenced porosity. Porosity differences were not observed in the polymerized resin bases in the water bath cycle for any thickness. © 2007 by The American College of Prosthodontists.

Thickness and marking quality of different occlusal contact registration strips

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)