The purpose of this study is to compare the antibacterial effect of Listerine® on two microorganisms (P. gingivalis and E. faecalis) with various root canal irrigants (NaOCl, CHX, EDTA) and to identify possibility of using Listerine® as a root canal irrigant. Porphyromonas gingivalis ATCC 3327 and Enterococcus faecalis ATCC 29212 were used in this experiment. For the test irrigants, 0.5%, 1%, 2.5%, 5.25% NaOCl, 0.1%, 0.2%, 1%, 2% CHX, 0.5M EDTA (18.6% EDTA) and Listerine® were prepared. Distiled water was used as control. Two methods-1) Comparison of turbidity in broth and 2) Agar diffusion test-were used to determine the extent of antibacterial effect of Listerine® and to compare it with that of NaOCl, CHX, and EDTA. All solutions tested were effective against two bacterial strains compared with control (p<0.001). Any concentration of NaOCl, CHX, and EDTA showed similarly high effectiveness against all bacterial strains. In all experiment, Listerine® showed significantly low antibacterial effect compared with the other root canal irrigants (p<0.05).

In conclusion, the results reflect remarkably low antibacterial effect of Listerine® as compared with root canal irrigants in general so it is not suitable for the root canal irrigant.

This study was conducted to evaluate canal configuration after shaping by ProTaper™ with various rotational speed in J-shaped simulated resin canals.

Forty simulated root canals were divided into 4 groups, and instrumented using by ProTaper™ at the rotational speed of 250, 300, 350 and 400 rpm. Pre-instrumented and post-instrumented images were taken by a scanner and those were superimposed. Outer canal width, inner canal width, total canal width, and amount of transportation from original axis were measured at 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 mm from apex. Instrumentation time, instrument deformation and fracture were recorded. Data were analyzed by means of one-way ANOVA followed by Scheffe's test.

The results were as follows

Regardless of rotational speed, at the 1~2 mm from the apex, axis of canal was transported to outer side of a curvature, and at 3~6 mm from the apex, to inner side of a curvature. Amounts of transportation from original axis were not significantly different among experimental groups except at 5 and 6 mm from the apex.

In conclusion, the rotational speed of ProTaper™ files in the range of 250~400 rpm does not affect the change of canal configuration, and high rotational speed reduces the instrumentation time. However, appearance of separation and distortion of Ni-Ti rotary files can occur in high rotational speed.

The purpose of this study was to compare the canal configuration after shaping by ProTaper rotary files and ProTaper hand files in resin simulated canals.

Forty resin simulated canals with a curvature of J-shape and S-shape were divided into four groups by 10 blocks each. Simulated root canals in resin block were prepared by ProTaper rotary files and ProTaper hand files using a crown-down pressureless technique. All simulated canals were prepared up to size #25 file at end-point of preparation. Pre- and post-instrumentation images were recorded with color scanner. Assessment of canal shape was completed with an image analysis program. Measurements were made at 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 mm from the apex. At each level, outer canal width, inner canal width, total canal width, and amount of transportation from original axis were recorded. Instrumentation time was recorded. The data were analyzed statistically using independent t-test.

The result was that ProTaper hand files cause significantly less canal transportation from original axis of canal body and maintain original canal configuration better than ProTaper rotary files, however ProTaper hand files take more shaping time.