This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Root canal treatment article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
This should be reinserted within the article as prose, rather than as a list of medical advisatory directives.
DRosenbach ( Talk | Contribs) 12:45, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
On the "root canal" page, the following picture exists: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/39/Root_Canal_Illustration_Molar.svg/400px-Root_Canal_Illustration_Molar.svg.png
Why is this image not part of the article that describes the procedure it actually shows? It certainly aids in understanding. Meta
The graph showing the advantage of using crows in preventing Fractures of endodontically treated teeth, is nowhere to be found in the cited reference. I’m afraid this might be a gross case of FRAUD where credible academic publications are misquoted to support a view or a service provided by a practicing professional. In any case, care must be taken, or the cited article must be read, before being cited.
That scared the shit out of me! I thought the blade of that thing was like 3 inches long. Someone please put in measurements or an image of a broach with a penny as a reference or something! Now I'm more relieved... Ahh...
F15x28 ( talk) 07:19, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
i just had the first part and see that picture with the icepick and blood and im shitting it. it is uneccessary and rank —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
94.196.102.36 (
talk)
18:06, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
In the middle of the section on endodonic therapy, the author states "A tooth with a root canal still has the ability to decay, and without proper home care and an adequate fluoride source the tooth structure can become severely decayed" without any qualification. How does flouride reach the inside of the tooth if the blood supply is no longer reaching it? Has any conclusive study been done to show that teeth that somehow magically get flouride inside them, last longer than teeth that do not? If this is indeed the case, then surely it should be the dentist's job to apply a flouride solution to the open tooth before a filling or crown is applied? freddie ( talk) 16:25, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
A tooth with or without a root canal treatment can decay. Good home care and fluoride are very important preventive measures to prevent decay. A tooth without a blood supply can take up topical application of fluoride...as well as teeth with a blood supply. The confusion here is simply the mechanism by which fluoride protects teeth. Fluoride is layed down in the development of the tooth...not to the inside of the tooth after development. What the author is saying here is that topical application of fluoride will further protect the tooth.
Teeth do not last longer because they have fluoride inside them...but because the fluoride ion was laid down in the development of the tooth structure itself. This happens due to systemic fluoride intake. This can reduce tooth decay up to 65%. It is absolutely moronic to me that people fight to keep fluoride out of the water suppy. Anything is a poison if too much is injested. One part per million prevents tooth decay...period. The topical application of fluoride further protects the tooth as it is taken up into the tooth surface to fight demineralization. If you think dentistry is too expensive, yet vote to keep fluoride out of the water supply...then neglect your home care and drink sugar, what are your expectations?? User:DDS1984. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DDS1984 ( talk • contribs) 01:27, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
In the first paragraph, we are told that "root canal" isn't the proper term for "endodontic therapy", but then in the rest of the article, we call it by the "imprecise" term root canal. Shouldn't all of those other occurrences to the procedure "root canal" use the proper term "endodonic therapy?" 72.213.137.61 ( talk) 05:00, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
The term "root canal" is used properly throughout the article. When an individual states: "I had a root canal", they are speaking improperly. The proper phrase is: "I had a root canal treatment" or endodontic therapy. When the author is discussing the "root canal" in the article, it is in terms of discussing the treatment of the canals within the root; or more specifically, the author is discussing what is being done in the hollows or within the canals which are located in the roots. A root canal is an actual hollow space (or an actual canal) inside the roots of the tooth. User: DDS1984. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DDS1984 ( talk • contribs) 01:43, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Seems to me we need more sourcing for this paragraph. The sole source is a patent, and patent summaries aren't particularly good sources -- certainly not good enough that we can say "occurrence of tool breakage is well documented". -- jpgordon ∇∆∇∆ 14:50, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
There are more procedural accidents than the breakage of an instrument. What about perforations?? Opening the wrong tooth? Missing canals? User: DDS1984 —Preceding unsigned comment added by DDS1984 ( talk • contribs) 01:46, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Copying this from Talk:Root_canal#Controversies_from_Meinig.27s_.22Root_Canal_Cover-Up.22_and_a_historical_review since here is more appropriate. I noticed George Meinig's Root Canal Cover Up (see summary) on Amazon. Haven't read the book, but did some research and found a 2000 California Dental Association article which has a good review of the "focal infection theory" (root canals leak bacteria into the blood, causing chronic illness). So if this controversy ever gets big, the 2000 CDA is an excellent resource - although it doesn't reference the book specifically, it is about the same "focal infection theory". Shankland seems to be a modern advocate of the theory who has published in peer-reviewed journals (see his summary).
Some more searching turned up Microbiology of endodontics and asepsis in endodontic practice, an excellent article which references Meinig specifically. I will look into incorporating into the article. II | ( t - c) 05:57, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
As I understand the term "endodontic therapy" it refers to a variety of treatment options (eg direct pulp capping) and not just to pulpectomy and obturation. Would it be worthwhile discussing the other treatments that fall under endodontic therapy, or even giving each their own article or am I mistaken about the term's definition? GadBeebe ( talk) 19:03, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
Article reads: The following substances are used as root canal irrigants during the root canal procedure: 5.25% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl); 6% sodium hypochlorite with surface modifiers for better flow into nooks and crannies; 2% chlorhexidine gluconate (Perioxidina Plus-2); 0.2% chlorhexidine gluconate plus 0.2% cetrimide (Cetrexidin); 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA); Framycetin sulfate (Septomixine); Biopure MTAD Mixture of citric acid, Docycline, and Tween-80 (detergent) by Dentsply USA (MTAD)
It's not apparent to this layman whether ALL of these are used (in the sequence given) or whether the treatment may use only one or perhaps several. Somebody please clarify. Casey ( talk) 14:09, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
The seventh paragraph of the Root Canal section contains some garbled text which I am not qualified to correct. "After removing as much of the internal pulp as possible, the root canals can be temporarily filled with calcium hydroxide paste. This strong alkaline base is left in for a week or more to disinfect and reduce inflammation in surrounding tissue.but still patient may complaint of pain in that case dentist left pulp devitalizer over canal thus one visit increased[8] Ibuprofen taken orally is commonly used before and/or after these procedures to reduce inflammation." -- 72.79.224.47 ( talk) 00:57, 18 October 2013 (UTC)BE
Hallo people! I'm considering about the advisability of building up pages about K-files and Gates Glidden drills and other specific terminology here used, obviously inserting internal links; this will require time but it can be done. What do you think about? And, ahem... is my English correct? Articioch ( talk) 22:33, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
I came accross this article Endodontic retreatment which has been previously deleted apparently, and has a merger proposal since last year. I agree that it should be merged with this one. Anyone can do it, I'm working on something else. Bouncingmolar ( talk) 03:11, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
![]() | The contents of the Endodontic retreatment page were merged into Root canal treatment on 29 September 2016. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
Why does this article use « » and “ ” quotes? Stepho talk 04:15, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
"
should be used for any quote mark anywhere, never double arrows and never "corrected" quote marks.
A loose noose (
talk)
12:35, 28 April 2018 (UTC)I have concerns about the section which reads:
"After endodontic surgery the tooth will be "dead", and if an infection is spread at the apex, root end surgery is required. Although the procedure is relatively painless when done properly,[2] the root canal remains a stereotypically fearsome dental operation."
1) A tooth is not dead after endodontics - there are still plenty of vital cells within the root cementum and within the periodontal ligament
2) If infection extends beyond the apex typical treatment involves orthograde (conventional) endodontics. If this is unsuccessful, recommended treatment is usually repeat orthograde filling [Carotte, P. British Dental Journal 2005]. Only then is retrograde (surgical) endodontics generally considered.
3) The statement: 'Although the procedure is relatively painless when done properly,[2] the root canal remains a stereotypically fearsome dental operation' is conjecture and the reference is not of high quality.
Cheers Thomas Friar ( talk) 12:26, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi and welcome. Yes this article needs a lot of work. Would comment on these specifics:
thanks Thomas Friar ( talk) 21:04, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
I've changed the section: 'Starting with 15 number H, which is also called a pathfinder, and after that the files' number increases up to 35 in molars and up to 50/55 in anterior teeth to widen the canals for a successful treatment'. Reason: file size selection is dependant upon tooth anatomy and does not always follow this sequence, particularly if greater taper/rotary instruments are utilized. Thanks Thomas Friar ( talk) 09:33, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
I feel the use of the term 'root canal' is confusing within this article. I appreciate 'root canal' is a lay term for 'root canal therapy' but it's use here is not helpful when there are multiple references to 'root canal' as an anatomic structure. I would suggest that 'root canal' is used only for description of the tooth's anatomic structure and 'root canal therapy' for description of the treatment. cheers Thomas Friar ( talk) 20:56, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
In the Treatment procedure section, there is the following sentence:
The patient may still complain of pain if the dentist left pulp devitalizer over canal thus one visit increased.
Is that correctly written, or is something missing or mistyped? Particular concerns appear to be:
Even if the language is intelligible to medical professionals, can it be stated in a more generally understandable way? In fact, that entire paragraph is a bit unclear. The term "devitalizer" is not used or explained elsewhere (i.e., earlier) in the article. Does it refer to calcium hydroxide? If so, the article states that the calcium hydroxide is "temporary"; perhaps a sentence should be added (probably before the cited sentence) to describe the follow-up (permanent) procedure. Maybe it is the absence of such explanation that is making the cited sentence obscure? Eplater ( talk) 20:27, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi.
If someone could add info about the rotary machine treatment as opposed to the classic needles to this article that would be great. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.18.35.79 ( talk) 12:44, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
Article needs a section on the history of root canal treatment. Mikedelsol ( talk) 06:30, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
The article needs to be reorganised and rewritten according to WP:MEDMOS#Surgeries and procedures.
I think above format is more useful to readers.- Nizil ( talk) 07:31, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: consensus not to move this article to Root canal. There is also no consensus to move Root canal in the discussion below. However, there is broad support for moving this article to a different title. Per WP:THREEOUTCOMES, moving Endodontic therapy to Root canal treatment at this juncture, with no bias against a new proposal to rename this article (e.g. to Root canal surgery) at any time. Dekimasu よ! 04:27, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
– This article is currently called endodontic therapy, but the WP:COMMONNAME for the subject of this article is "root canal". There is another article called root canal which covers another meaning of that term, which is that a root canal is an anatomical feature.
This therapy article is getting about 20k views a month and the anatomy article is getting about 30k views a month, which places them among the opt 0.1% of Wikipedia articles by popularity. I think that the demand is actually about 45k a month for the therapy and 5k or less a month to learn about general mouth anatomy. The article currently called root canal cites 1 source, and there are 1000s of WP:MEDRS sources covering the concept of the therapy. Because of the weight of the sources, and because this is top article by popularity because of the medical procedure, and because this procedure has popular recognition by the name "root canal", I propose that this article take the title "root canal" and the anatomy article get moved to "root canal (anatomy). Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:47, 4 February 2019 (UTC) --Relisting. — Amakuru ( talk) 15:27, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
This bit reads poorly (at best) and has some red flags for bias (at worst).
> However, long and proven knowledge has shown that the results will increase dramatically if a small dose of paraformaldehyde is added to the zinc oxide. This was clearly demonstrated in a retrospective study (Telander 1966) who showed a success rate of 92 % at a six year follow up. No signs of infection were seen. Several studies in the 21 century have confirmed the high success rate. (A. Steup 2001, U. Teeuwen 2007, P. Venuti 2014)
"long and proven knowledge" sounds like someone trying too hard, the reference formatting is weird and it is overly detailed (and defensive) for the intro text.
I'm not an expert, but I would guess that replacing with something like: > paraformaldehyde is sometimes added to the zinc oxide [ref] would be appropriate.
Da5nsy ( talk) 17:47, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
There are a couple of paragraphs under "Filling the root canal" on the Sargenti method. As far as I can tell, consensus in the dental community is that this is harmful and it is supported only by a small fringe of dentists. [1] [2] [3] I don't see any reason why we should mention it at all, unless we're going to add a section on historical, proposed, or pseudoscientific methods of root canal treatment. Does anyone think we should keep it in the article? Dakane2 ( talk) 21:49, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
References
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Root canal treatment article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
This should be reinserted within the article as prose, rather than as a list of medical advisatory directives.
DRosenbach ( Talk | Contribs) 12:45, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
On the "root canal" page, the following picture exists: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/39/Root_Canal_Illustration_Molar.svg/400px-Root_Canal_Illustration_Molar.svg.png
Why is this image not part of the article that describes the procedure it actually shows? It certainly aids in understanding. Meta
The graph showing the advantage of using crows in preventing Fractures of endodontically treated teeth, is nowhere to be found in the cited reference. I’m afraid this might be a gross case of FRAUD where credible academic publications are misquoted to support a view or a service provided by a practicing professional. In any case, care must be taken, or the cited article must be read, before being cited.
That scared the shit out of me! I thought the blade of that thing was like 3 inches long. Someone please put in measurements or an image of a broach with a penny as a reference or something! Now I'm more relieved... Ahh...
F15x28 ( talk) 07:19, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
i just had the first part and see that picture with the icepick and blood and im shitting it. it is uneccessary and rank —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
94.196.102.36 (
talk)
18:06, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
In the middle of the section on endodonic therapy, the author states "A tooth with a root canal still has the ability to decay, and without proper home care and an adequate fluoride source the tooth structure can become severely decayed" without any qualification. How does flouride reach the inside of the tooth if the blood supply is no longer reaching it? Has any conclusive study been done to show that teeth that somehow magically get flouride inside them, last longer than teeth that do not? If this is indeed the case, then surely it should be the dentist's job to apply a flouride solution to the open tooth before a filling or crown is applied? freddie ( talk) 16:25, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
A tooth with or without a root canal treatment can decay. Good home care and fluoride are very important preventive measures to prevent decay. A tooth without a blood supply can take up topical application of fluoride...as well as teeth with a blood supply. The confusion here is simply the mechanism by which fluoride protects teeth. Fluoride is layed down in the development of the tooth...not to the inside of the tooth after development. What the author is saying here is that topical application of fluoride will further protect the tooth.
Teeth do not last longer because they have fluoride inside them...but because the fluoride ion was laid down in the development of the tooth structure itself. This happens due to systemic fluoride intake. This can reduce tooth decay up to 65%. It is absolutely moronic to me that people fight to keep fluoride out of the water suppy. Anything is a poison if too much is injested. One part per million prevents tooth decay...period. The topical application of fluoride further protects the tooth as it is taken up into the tooth surface to fight demineralization. If you think dentistry is too expensive, yet vote to keep fluoride out of the water supply...then neglect your home care and drink sugar, what are your expectations?? User:DDS1984. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DDS1984 ( talk • contribs) 01:27, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
In the first paragraph, we are told that "root canal" isn't the proper term for "endodontic therapy", but then in the rest of the article, we call it by the "imprecise" term root canal. Shouldn't all of those other occurrences to the procedure "root canal" use the proper term "endodonic therapy?" 72.213.137.61 ( talk) 05:00, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
The term "root canal" is used properly throughout the article. When an individual states: "I had a root canal", they are speaking improperly. The proper phrase is: "I had a root canal treatment" or endodontic therapy. When the author is discussing the "root canal" in the article, it is in terms of discussing the treatment of the canals within the root; or more specifically, the author is discussing what is being done in the hollows or within the canals which are located in the roots. A root canal is an actual hollow space (or an actual canal) inside the roots of the tooth. User: DDS1984. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DDS1984 ( talk • contribs) 01:43, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Seems to me we need more sourcing for this paragraph. The sole source is a patent, and patent summaries aren't particularly good sources -- certainly not good enough that we can say "occurrence of tool breakage is well documented". -- jpgordon ∇∆∇∆ 14:50, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
There are more procedural accidents than the breakage of an instrument. What about perforations?? Opening the wrong tooth? Missing canals? User: DDS1984 —Preceding unsigned comment added by DDS1984 ( talk • contribs) 01:46, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Copying this from Talk:Root_canal#Controversies_from_Meinig.27s_.22Root_Canal_Cover-Up.22_and_a_historical_review since here is more appropriate. I noticed George Meinig's Root Canal Cover Up (see summary) on Amazon. Haven't read the book, but did some research and found a 2000 California Dental Association article which has a good review of the "focal infection theory" (root canals leak bacteria into the blood, causing chronic illness). So if this controversy ever gets big, the 2000 CDA is an excellent resource - although it doesn't reference the book specifically, it is about the same "focal infection theory". Shankland seems to be a modern advocate of the theory who has published in peer-reviewed journals (see his summary).
Some more searching turned up Microbiology of endodontics and asepsis in endodontic practice, an excellent article which references Meinig specifically. I will look into incorporating into the article. II | ( t - c) 05:57, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
As I understand the term "endodontic therapy" it refers to a variety of treatment options (eg direct pulp capping) and not just to pulpectomy and obturation. Would it be worthwhile discussing the other treatments that fall under endodontic therapy, or even giving each their own article or am I mistaken about the term's definition? GadBeebe ( talk) 19:03, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
Article reads: The following substances are used as root canal irrigants during the root canal procedure: 5.25% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl); 6% sodium hypochlorite with surface modifiers for better flow into nooks and crannies; 2% chlorhexidine gluconate (Perioxidina Plus-2); 0.2% chlorhexidine gluconate plus 0.2% cetrimide (Cetrexidin); 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA); Framycetin sulfate (Septomixine); Biopure MTAD Mixture of citric acid, Docycline, and Tween-80 (detergent) by Dentsply USA (MTAD)
It's not apparent to this layman whether ALL of these are used (in the sequence given) or whether the treatment may use only one or perhaps several. Somebody please clarify. Casey ( talk) 14:09, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
The seventh paragraph of the Root Canal section contains some garbled text which I am not qualified to correct. "After removing as much of the internal pulp as possible, the root canals can be temporarily filled with calcium hydroxide paste. This strong alkaline base is left in for a week or more to disinfect and reduce inflammation in surrounding tissue.but still patient may complaint of pain in that case dentist left pulp devitalizer over canal thus one visit increased[8] Ibuprofen taken orally is commonly used before and/or after these procedures to reduce inflammation." -- 72.79.224.47 ( talk) 00:57, 18 October 2013 (UTC)BE
Hallo people! I'm considering about the advisability of building up pages about K-files and Gates Glidden drills and other specific terminology here used, obviously inserting internal links; this will require time but it can be done. What do you think about? And, ahem... is my English correct? Articioch ( talk) 22:33, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
I came accross this article Endodontic retreatment which has been previously deleted apparently, and has a merger proposal since last year. I agree that it should be merged with this one. Anyone can do it, I'm working on something else. Bouncingmolar ( talk) 03:11, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
![]() | The contents of the Endodontic retreatment page were merged into Root canal treatment on 29 September 2016. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
Why does this article use « » and “ ” quotes? Stepho talk 04:15, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
"
should be used for any quote mark anywhere, never double arrows and never "corrected" quote marks.
A loose noose (
talk)
12:35, 28 April 2018 (UTC)I have concerns about the section which reads:
"After endodontic surgery the tooth will be "dead", and if an infection is spread at the apex, root end surgery is required. Although the procedure is relatively painless when done properly,[2] the root canal remains a stereotypically fearsome dental operation."
1) A tooth is not dead after endodontics - there are still plenty of vital cells within the root cementum and within the periodontal ligament
2) If infection extends beyond the apex typical treatment involves orthograde (conventional) endodontics. If this is unsuccessful, recommended treatment is usually repeat orthograde filling [Carotte, P. British Dental Journal 2005]. Only then is retrograde (surgical) endodontics generally considered.
3) The statement: 'Although the procedure is relatively painless when done properly,[2] the root canal remains a stereotypically fearsome dental operation' is conjecture and the reference is not of high quality.
Cheers Thomas Friar ( talk) 12:26, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi and welcome. Yes this article needs a lot of work. Would comment on these specifics:
thanks Thomas Friar ( talk) 21:04, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
I've changed the section: 'Starting with 15 number H, which is also called a pathfinder, and after that the files' number increases up to 35 in molars and up to 50/55 in anterior teeth to widen the canals for a successful treatment'. Reason: file size selection is dependant upon tooth anatomy and does not always follow this sequence, particularly if greater taper/rotary instruments are utilized. Thanks Thomas Friar ( talk) 09:33, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
I feel the use of the term 'root canal' is confusing within this article. I appreciate 'root canal' is a lay term for 'root canal therapy' but it's use here is not helpful when there are multiple references to 'root canal' as an anatomic structure. I would suggest that 'root canal' is used only for description of the tooth's anatomic structure and 'root canal therapy' for description of the treatment. cheers Thomas Friar ( talk) 20:56, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
In the Treatment procedure section, there is the following sentence:
The patient may still complain of pain if the dentist left pulp devitalizer over canal thus one visit increased.
Is that correctly written, or is something missing or mistyped? Particular concerns appear to be:
Even if the language is intelligible to medical professionals, can it be stated in a more generally understandable way? In fact, that entire paragraph is a bit unclear. The term "devitalizer" is not used or explained elsewhere (i.e., earlier) in the article. Does it refer to calcium hydroxide? If so, the article states that the calcium hydroxide is "temporary"; perhaps a sentence should be added (probably before the cited sentence) to describe the follow-up (permanent) procedure. Maybe it is the absence of such explanation that is making the cited sentence obscure? Eplater ( talk) 20:27, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi.
If someone could add info about the rotary machine treatment as opposed to the classic needles to this article that would be great. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.18.35.79 ( talk) 12:44, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
Article needs a section on the history of root canal treatment. Mikedelsol ( talk) 06:30, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
The article needs to be reorganised and rewritten according to WP:MEDMOS#Surgeries and procedures.
I think above format is more useful to readers.- Nizil ( talk) 07:31, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: consensus not to move this article to Root canal. There is also no consensus to move Root canal in the discussion below. However, there is broad support for moving this article to a different title. Per WP:THREEOUTCOMES, moving Endodontic therapy to Root canal treatment at this juncture, with no bias against a new proposal to rename this article (e.g. to Root canal surgery) at any time. Dekimasu よ! 04:27, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
– This article is currently called endodontic therapy, but the WP:COMMONNAME for the subject of this article is "root canal". There is another article called root canal which covers another meaning of that term, which is that a root canal is an anatomical feature.
This therapy article is getting about 20k views a month and the anatomy article is getting about 30k views a month, which places them among the opt 0.1% of Wikipedia articles by popularity. I think that the demand is actually about 45k a month for the therapy and 5k or less a month to learn about general mouth anatomy. The article currently called root canal cites 1 source, and there are 1000s of WP:MEDRS sources covering the concept of the therapy. Because of the weight of the sources, and because this is top article by popularity because of the medical procedure, and because this procedure has popular recognition by the name "root canal", I propose that this article take the title "root canal" and the anatomy article get moved to "root canal (anatomy). Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:47, 4 February 2019 (UTC) --Relisting. — Amakuru ( talk) 15:27, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
This bit reads poorly (at best) and has some red flags for bias (at worst).
> However, long and proven knowledge has shown that the results will increase dramatically if a small dose of paraformaldehyde is added to the zinc oxide. This was clearly demonstrated in a retrospective study (Telander 1966) who showed a success rate of 92 % at a six year follow up. No signs of infection were seen. Several studies in the 21 century have confirmed the high success rate. (A. Steup 2001, U. Teeuwen 2007, P. Venuti 2014)
"long and proven knowledge" sounds like someone trying too hard, the reference formatting is weird and it is overly detailed (and defensive) for the intro text.
I'm not an expert, but I would guess that replacing with something like: > paraformaldehyde is sometimes added to the zinc oxide [ref] would be appropriate.
Da5nsy ( talk) 17:47, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
There are a couple of paragraphs under "Filling the root canal" on the Sargenti method. As far as I can tell, consensus in the dental community is that this is harmful and it is supported only by a small fringe of dentists. [1] [2] [3] I don't see any reason why we should mention it at all, unless we're going to add a section on historical, proposed, or pseudoscientific methods of root canal treatment. Does anyone think we should keep it in the article? Dakane2 ( talk) 21:49, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
References