Hand and ultrasonic instrumentation for orthograde root canal treatment of permanent teeth

Root canal treatment is a frequently performed dental procedure and is carried out on teeth in which irreversible pulpitis has led to necrosis of the dental pulp. Removal of the necrotic tissue remnants and cleaning and shaping of the root canal are important phases of root canal treatment. Treatment options include the use of hand and rotary instruments and methods using ultrasonic or sonic equipment. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this systematic review of randomized controlled trials were to determine the relative clinical effectiveness of hand instrumentation versus ultrasonic instrumentation alone or in conjunction with hand instrumentation for orthograde root canal treatment of permanent teeth. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The search strategy retrieved 226 references from the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register (7), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (12), MEDLINE (192), EMBASE (8) and LILACS (7). No language restriction was applied. The last electronic search was conducted on December 13th, 2007. Screening of eligible studies was conducted in duplicate and independently. RESULTS: Results were to be expressed as fixed-effect or random-effects models using mean differences for continuous outcomes and risk ratios for dichotomous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals. Heterogeneity was to be investigated including both clinical and methodological factors. No eligible randomized controlled trials were identified. CONCLUSIONS: This review illustrates the current lack of published or ongoing randomized controlled trials and the unavailability of high-level evidence based on clinically relevant outcomes referring to the effectiveness of ultrasonic instrumentation used alone or as an adjunct to hand instrumentation for orthograde root canal treatment. In the absence of reliable research-based evidence, clinicians should base their decisions on clinical experience, individual circumstances and in conjunction with patients' preferences where appropriate. Future randomized controlled trials might focus more closely on evaluating the effectiveness of combinations of these interventions with an emphasis on not only clinically relevant, but also patient-centered outcomes.

Normative MR Cervical Spinal Canal Dimensions

Purpose To provide normal values of the cervical spinal canal and spinal cord dimensions in several planes with respect to spinal level, age, sex, and body height. Materials and Methods This study was approved by the institutional review board; all individuals provided signed informed consent. In a prospective multicenter study, two blinded raters independently examined cervical spine magnetic resonance (MR) images of 140 healthy volunteers who were white. The midsagittal diameters and areas of spinal canal and spinal cord, respectively, were measured at the midvertebral levels of C1, C3, and C6. A multivariate general linear model described the influence of sex, body height, age, and spinal level on the measured values. Results There were differences for sex, spinal level, interaction between sex and level, and body height, while age had significant yet limited influence. Normative ranges for the sagittal diameters and areas of spinal canal and spinal cord were defined at C1, C3, and C6 levels for men and women. In addition to a calculation of normative ranges for a specific sex, spinal level, age, and body height data, data for three different height subgroups at 45 years of age were extracted. These results show a range of the spinal canal dimensions at C1 (from 10.7 to 19.7 mm), C3 (from 9.4 to 17.2 mm), and C6 (from 9.2 to 16.8 mm) levels. Conclusion : The dimensions of the cervical spinal canal and cord in healthy individuals are associated with spinal level, sex, age, and height. © RSNA, 2013 Online supplemental material is available for this article.