Objective: To compare the time taken by endodontic and pedodontic residents for stainless steel and nickel–titanium (NiTi) root canal preparation time for primary molar.
Methods: Nineteen deciduous molar teeth were selected and divided into two groups: group I instrumented with NiTi rotary files (G-files followed by Revo-S) and group II instrumented with manual K-files.
Results: The preparation time required per canal by the endodontist subgroup was 151.9±39.2 and 57.47±12.03 s in the stainless steel and NiTi groups, respectively. The preparation time required per canal in the pedodontist group was 157.5±42.5 and 68.05±15.8 s in the stainless steel and NiTi groups, respectively. There was a significant difference between the stainless steel and NiTi groups (p<0.05). However, there was no significant difference between the endodontist and pedodontist subgroups (p>0.05).
Conclusion: Within the limitation of the present study, the preparation time required in the stainless steel group was significantly shorter than that in the NiTi rotary group. However, there was no significant difference between endodontic and pedodontic residents in terms of root canal preparation time.

Objective: To determine the variability in the distance between apical constriction determined by an apex locator and the radiographic apex on digital radiographs in a Moroccan population.
Methods: Once the apex locator indicated the position of the apical constriction marked by 0.5, an existing lime X-ray was taken and measurements were made using the Kodak Dental Imaging Software 6.10.8.3.
Results: The average distance between the tip of the instrument and the radiographic apex (DTIRA) was 0.792 mm + 0.61. The position of the apical constriction at 0.5 mm of the radiographic apex is in only 21% of selected teeth. Ninety eight out of 100 teeth had a DRLAAR of <2 mm. Considering these 98 teeth, 40.8% of them had a DTIRA in the range of 0–0.5 mm, 38.8% in the range of 0.5–1 mm, and 20.4% had DTIRA of >1 mm.
Conclusion: There is a great variability in the distance between the apical constriction determined by an apex locator and the radiographic apex on digital radiographs in this population. Indeed, the subtraction of 0.5 mm from the latter, as recommended by several authors, is in only 21% of selected teeth.

Objective: To investigate and compare the composition and micro surface structure of two different calcium silicate–containing filling materials using energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM).
Methods: The materials investigated included DiaRoot BioAggregate (BA) and MTA Angelus (MTA-A). After mixing, each filling material was placed into cubes of 3 mm3. The hardening samples were compressed and broken and these samples were used for SEM examination. For elemental analysis and chemical composition, some samples were powdered and EDX was performed.
Results: EDX findings indicated that the major constituents of BA included calcium, oxygen, tantalum, and silicon. The chemical structure of MTA-A was similar to that of BA except for the absence of tantalum (radiopacifier). In addition, MTA-A contained some elements, e.g., aluminum, sodium, potassium, phosphorus, iron, rubidium, and strontium in trace amounts. The chemistry of compounds of BA filling material is more biologically compatible as a restorative material. In SEM images, BA was noted to be granular and almost spherical and particles of all sizes were observed. MTA-A was detected as a porous structure; its particles were granular, but locally planar layers were also detected.
Conclusion: The mineralogical composition of BA was different from that of MTA-A. As opposed to MTA-A, BA did not contain tricalcium aluminate phase and it included tantalum oxide as a radiopacifier. SEM images of MTA-A represented a more porous surface structure than that of BA. In light of these findings, BioAggregate seems to be a more suitable root-end filling material in terms of mineral content and surface structure.

A maxillary second molar tooth with two palatal roots is an uncommon anomaly. In this case report, we describe non-surgical endodontic treatment of a maxillary second molar with two palatal roots. The second palatal root was discovered during preparation of the endodontic access cavity. Biomechanical preparation of all root canals was performed using nickel–titanium (NiTi) rotary instruments. Root canal obturation was performed with a root canal sealer and gutta-percha cones using the lateral compaction technique. The tooth was then restored with composite resin. It may be difficult to detect extra roots in the maxillary posterior region on radiographs because of superposition of various anatomic structures. A careful examination of the pulp chamber can aid in detecting extra canals that are not radiographically visible.

Mandibular premolars have been reported with complex anatomical aberrations, making endodontic treatment of these teeth extremely difficult. A case of endodontic retreatment of a mandibular second premolar exhibiting root canal bifurcation (Vertucci type V root canal configuration) of two apical foramina was described. A 39-year-old female with a non-significant medical history presented with a chief complaint of pain in a previously endodontically treated tooth. Clinical examination revealed tenderness to percussion. Intraoral periapical radiographs taken at different angulations revealed one root and two apical foramina. The main root canal was filled short of the apex and the other canal was not filled due to the broken file. Root canal retreatment was performed following the standard protocols. Although the prevalence of one root and two apical foramina in mandibular premolar is very low, clinicians should always be aware of variations in the number of roots and canals for the proper management of such cases.

Extraoral sinus tracts of endodontic origin are often misdiagnosed. The presence of these formations on the skin and, in some cases, their location at a distance from the odontogenic source lead to difficulties in the identification of these infections. It is important for these infections to be correctly diagnosed and separated from other lesions by dentists to prevent patients from being exposed to unnecessary medications and treatments. Root canal treatment of related tooth provides success in many cases of extraoral sinus tract of endodontic origin. The following case presents the management of a cutaneous sinus tract originating from a mandibular central incisor by conventional endodontic treatment.