Objectives: To evaluate the success of certain methods that can be used in the removal of separated instruments from different levels in curved and straight canals.Methods: Instrument removal attempts were undertaken on 63 straight and 30 curved canals containing a pre-fractured instrument using the ultrasonics under the visualization of an operating microscope or conventional methods. In straight canals, a Masseran Kit was additionally used to these techniques. The success of instrument removal in relation to the techniques used and the location of the fragments in the root canal were evaluated. Successful treatment was defined by the removal or complete by passing of the fragments.Results: The overall success rate was found 93.3% with ultrasonics and 66.6% when only conventional methodswere used in curved canals. In straight canals, also the success rate was the highest with ultrasonics (95.2%). This was followed by conventional method (80.9%) and the least by Masserann Kit (47.6%). When the success rate was investigated according to the location of the broken instruments, the lowest rate was found in the apical third of root canal.Conclusions: Location of the fragment and the shape of the root canal influence the success of fractured instrument management. Ultrasonics under the visualization of an operating microscope was found to be an effective removal method. (Eur J Dent 2009;3:90-95)

The objectives of this study were to compare the fracture strength of endocrown restorations fabricated with different preparation depth and various CAD/CAM ceramics, and to assess the fracture types. Endodontically treated 100 extracted human permanent maxillary centrals were divided into two preparation depth groups as short (S: 3-mm-deep) and long (L: 6-mm-deep), then five ceramic subgroups, namely: feldspathic-ceramic (Vita Mark II-VM2), lithium-disilicate glass-ceramic (IPS e.max CAD-E.max), resin-ceramic (LAVA Ultimate-LU), polymer infiltrated ceramic (Vita Enamic-VE) and monoblock zirconia (inCoris TZI-TZI) (n=10/subgroup). The endocrowns were fabricated by CAD/CAM and were cemented with resin cement (RelyX U200). The teeth were thermally cycled (5,000cycles) and fracture tests were performed at 45º angle to the teeth. The data were statistically analyzed (Kruskal-Wallis, Mann Whitney U), failure modes were evaluated with stereomicroscopy. Zirconia group provided the statistically highest fracture strength, but also exhibited non-repairable failures. Preparation depth has an effect on the fracture strength only for feldspathic ceramic.

This study aimed to compare the quality and readability of the responses generated by 3 publicly available artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots in answering frequently asked questions (FAQs) related to Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology (OMR) to assess their suitability for patient education. Fifteen OMR-related questions were selected from professional patient information websites. These questions were posed to ChatGPT-3.5 by OpenAI, Gemini 1.5 Pro by Google, and Copilot by Microsoft to generate responses. Three board-certified OMR specialists evaluated the responses regarding scientific adequacy, ease of understanding, and overall reader satisfaction. Readability was assessed using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) scores. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was conducted to compare the scores assigned by the evaluators to the responses from the chatbots and professional websites. Interevaluator agreement was examined by calculating the Fleiss kappa coefficient. There were no significant differences between groups in terms of scientific adequacy. In terms of readability, chatbots had overall mean FKGL and FRE scores of 12.97 and 34.11, respectively. Interevaluator agreement level was generally high. Although chatbots are relatively good at responding to FAQs, validating AI-generated information using input from healthcare professionals can enhance patient care and safety. Readability of the text content in the chatbots and websites requires high reading levels.

Objectives: To investigate the quality of root fillings and coronal restorations and their association with periapical status in an adult Turkish subpopulation.Methods: A total of 400 subjects were examined. Panoramic radiographs of all participants and additional periapical radiographs of affected teeth were processed. The frequency of root canal treatment and the periapical status of all root filled teeth were evaluated. The relationship between the radiographic quality of root fillings and coronal restorations was examined by chi-squared statistical analysis.Results: A total of 9460 teeth were examined. The total number of root filled teeth was 890 (9.39%), and 658 (73.9%) had apical periodontitis (AP). There was a significant correlation between the presence of periapical pathology and inadequate root canal fillings (P <.05). Presence of AP in root filled teeth was associated with inadequate adaptation of the filling (OR=1.097; P=0.54), and with poor radiographic quality of the coronal restoration (OR=0.91; P=0.70), and with poor radiographic quality of the filling restoration (OR=0.97; P=0.92). Only 24.5% of the root fillings were adequate. The highest percentage of root fillings was found in maxillary right first molars (6.9%).Conclusions: The results demonstrate a low prevalence of root-filled teeth and poor quality of coronal restorations and root fillings consistent with a high prevalence of apical periodontitis in a Turkish subpopulation. (Eur J Dent 2010;4:17-22)