The modern endodontic therapy

Admin Dental Press

Edition V02N03 | Year 2012 | Editorial Editorial | Pages 3 to 3

Gilson Blitzkow Sydney

In the second edition of his book Endodontics, Ingle added a photo of the Washington Monument, representing the great integrity that seemed vital to the specialty at that time.
In its third edition, in 1985, the picture was of Mount Rainier, a massive base that rose in a spectacular ridge. Noting that mount, Ingle thought that, when reviewing the mountain of endodontic achievements, one gets impressed with the solid foundation of research and important observations that lead us to the zenith of our progress. Still, he claimed we were being crushed by an avalanche of ideas, techniques and tools, all of them exciting, some threatening and many still not adequately tested. So, for him, the intact splendor of our “mountain” of knowledge was being threatened. He wondered: Could Mount Rainier become another St. Helens, an active volcano in southwest Washington state that in 1980, after 127 years of inactivity, came into violent eruption, followed by a tremor of 5.1 points on the Richter scale, bringing the northern part of the volcano down, decreasing by 400 meters at its height and increasing its width in a mile?
Today, over 25 years later, the threat remains the same. Automated systems are launched first and tested later! The industry has been resolute in the purpose to directly influence the teaching of Endodontics. But only few educational institutions are prepared for the new technologies. And, leaving it to the industry, we face charges that do not correspond to reality. The race to disseminate new systems brings a number of concerns. As stated Spangberg in 2001, the apparent simplicity of the technique using some instruments is an invitation to ignorance. Without a deep knowledge of the anatomy and pathology, instrumentation does not increase the success rate of endodontic therapy. The reality is that the increase in sales of new systems does not necessarily mean its implementation in daily clinical practice.
It is necessary to understand that it is from the constant practice and training that we’ll execute, in automation, all the experience gained from years of manual training. But, wouldn’t the idea be going the other way around now?

Related articles