[doi: 10.1063/1.3594709]“
“Objective. The purpose of this study was to compare the bond strength of Resilon/Epiphany self-etch (SE) and gutta-percha/AH26 after different irrigation protocols.
Study design. Extracted single-rooted human teeth were divided into 4 groups and prepared. According to irrigation protocols, groups were:
5.25% NaOCl followed by 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) (groups 1 and 2); and 1.3% NaOCl followed by MTAD (a mixture of tetracycline isomer, an acid, and a detergent) (groups 3 and 4). The root canals were obturated with either gutta-percha/AH26 (groups 1 and 3) or Resilon/Epiphany SE (groups 2 and 4). Push-out bond strength and failure modes were determined.
Results. Gutta-percha/AH26 showed significantly higher bond strength than Resilon/Epiphany SE. The group with 5.25% NaOCl + EDTA and gutta-percha Angiogenesis inhibitor had a significantly higher bond strength than all of the other groups (P < .05); 1.3% NaOCl + MTAD with gutta-percha showed significantly higher bond strength than 5.25% NaOCl + EDTA with Resilon and 1.3% GSK461364 Cell Cycle inhibitor NaOCl + MTAD with Resilon. There was no significant difference between the bond strengths of the Resilon groups (P > .05). The failure mode for all of the experimental groups was mainly adhesive.
Conclusions. Irrigation with 5.25%
NaOCl + EDTA can be a better conditioner before using gutta-percha/AH26. The bond strength of Resilon/Epiphany SE was not different after irrigation with 5.25% NaOCl + EDTA or 1.3% NaOCl + MTAD. (Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2010;110:e88-e92)”
“Objective: To investigate the reliability of the physician-assisted International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF). Patients and Methods: 374 patients who applied to our clinic with erectile dysfunction problems
were asked to complete the IIEF questionnaire; 225 patients who visited the clinic again within 1-3 days completed the IIEF questionnaire again. All questions were answered by the patients themselves. At both visits, https://www.selleckchem.com/products/z-vad-fmk.html necessary explanations were provided by the physician to patients who requested assistance. Data obtained from the first and second questionnaires were compared. Results: There was a significant difference between the first and second questionnaires with respect to certain questions. Nevertheless, no significant difference was found between the IIEF. 1 and IIEF. 2 scores (p > 0.20) for the group overall or for any subgroups. The test-retest correlation coefficients for all patients were highly significant (r = 0.909, p < 0.01). A high degree of internal consistency was observed for each of the first and second physician-assisted IIEF questionnaires (Cronbach’s alpha 0.926 and 0.908, respectively, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Physician assistance increased the comprehensibility of the IIEF in elderly patients and in patients with low education levels.