|
|
||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1 Temple University School of Dentistry, Department of Endodontics, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
The study has established that a thermometer small enough in diameter to pass through the root canal to the apex of the tooth could be constructed and perform with reliable accuracy.
Of the periapical recordings, the most (30) occurred at 94.9° F. This was 38.5 per cent of the total of 78 recordings. The second most frequent periapical temperature was 96.5° F., which occurred only six times. Analysis of Table 2 indicates clearly that no specific oral temperature was found to occur invariably with a specific periapical temperature.
By plotting a norm that represents a 1:1 relationship of oral and periapical temperatures, there was a visual base line for comparison with the experimental findings (Fig. 2). If the oral temperature rose equally with the periapical temperature, the experimental graph line would be coincidental with the normal graph line. This was certainly not the case, for observation will readily disclose the wide range of the experimental line.
In all teeth with periapical temperatures at 95.0° F. or less, there was a consistent lack of clinical or subjective symptoms in and around the teeth. In teeth with periapical temperatures of 98.0° F. and above, acute clinical symptoms were always present.
Submitted on April 19, 1965
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| IADR Journals | Advances in Dental Research ® |
| Journal of Dental Research ® | Critical Reviews (1990-2004) |