A novel simplified numbering system for dental burs

A universally accepted standardization is of great value for any material or equipment that is used globally. A single number or name should represent the particular material or instrument throughout the world. Since the dental burs are used worldwide, a single standard numbering system, which gives a unique specification for each bur in any part of the world, is mandatory. Though the existing systems have tried to attain this goal, they have their own advantages and limitations that are explained in detail in this article. So, the idea of proposing a novel system is to formulate a simple way of mentioning each bur with its dimension and composition without the need for memorizing the numbers

Evaluation of the pulp chamber size of human maxillary first molars: An institution based<i> in vitro</i> study

The aim of this in vitro study was to determine the morphological measurements of the pulp chamber and also to establish the relationship of the cemento-enamel junction (CEJ) to the roof of the pulp chamber of the maxillary first molars in an Indian population. One hundred extracted human maxillary first molars were used. Each molar tooth was radiographed by radio visiography (RVG). Measurements were made by using the grid option in RVG. The results (mean &#x00B1; SD; in mm) were as follows: distance from floor of the pulp chamber to the furcation = 2.7 &#x00B1; 0.63; distance from roof of the pulp chamber to the furcation = 5.34 &#x00B1; 0.9; distance from tip of the palatal cusp to the furcation = 11.58 &#x00B1; 1.01; distance from the tip of the palatal cusp to the floor of the pulp chamber = 8.86 &#x00B1; 0.68; distance from the tip of the palatal cusp to the roof of the pulp chamber = 6.2 &#x00B1; 0.66; height of the pulp chamber = 2.62 &#x00B1; 0.61. The results of these measurements revealed that the morphological measurements of the maxillary first molars in the Indian population were similar to that reported by previous studies; the roof of the pulp chamber was found at the CEJ in 96&#x0025; of the specimens

Interaction between lidocaine hydrochloride (with and without adrenaline) and various irrigants: A nuclear magnetic resonance analysis

Background: Interaction between local anesthetic solution, lidocaine hydrochloride (with and without adrenaline), and root canal irrigants such as sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl), ethylene diamine tetra-acetic acid (EDTA), and chlorhexidine (CHX) has not been studied earlier. Hence, the purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the chemical interaction between 2% lidocaine hydrochloride (with and without adrenaline) and commonly used root canal irrigants, NaOCl, EDTA, and CHX. Materials and Methods: Samples were divided into eight experimental groups: Group I-Lidocaine hydrochloride (with adrenaline)/3% NaOCl, Group II-Lidocaine hydrochloride (with adrenaline)/17% EDTA, Group III- Lidocaine hydrochloride (with adrenaline)/2% CHX, Group IV-Lidocaine hydrochloride (without adrenaline)/3% NaOCl, Group V-Lidocaine hydrochloride (without adrenaline)/17% EDTA, Group VI-Lidocaine hydrochloride (without adrenaline)/2% CHX, and two control groups: Group VII-Lidocaine hydrochloride (with adrenaline)/deionized water and Group VIII-Lidocaine hydrochloride (without adrenaline)/deionized water. The respective solutions of various groups were mixed in equal proportions (1 ml each) and observed for precipitate formation. Chemical composition of the formed precipitate was then analysed by nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy (NMR) and confirmed with diazotation test. Results: In groups I and IV, a white precipitate was observed in all the samples on mixing the respective solutions, which showed a color change to reddish brown after 15 minutes. This precipitate was then analysed by NMR spectroscopy and was observed to be 2,6-xylidine, a reported toxic compound. The experimental groups II, III, V, and VI and control groups VII and VIII showed no precipitate formation in any of the respective samples, until 2 hours. Conclusion: Interaction between lidocaine hydrochloride (with and without adrenaline) and NaOCl showed precipitate formation containing 2,6-xylidine, a toxic compound