The main thrust in this paper is to introduce my dental colleagues to the fundamentals of microendodontic surgery and other recent materials used. I am going to discuss these points…. 1. Use of operating microscope in endosurgery. 2. Miniature endodontic surgical instruments. 3. New recent root – end filling materials. 4. Guided tissue regeneration by membrane technique. 5. Membrane technique replaced by calcium sulfate. 6. Root-end preparation by Er. YAG laser radiation.

Pulpo-periapical lesions have an inherent potential for healing non-surgically, provided the source of irritant is removed from the canal during instrumentation and the canal is kept dry and bacteria – free during healing. Calcium Hydroxide [Ca[OH]2] has successfully been tried as intra – canal medicament for management of such lesions in the present study. The clinical and radiological evaluation support the evidence.

Inflammatory root resorption is the most common sequelae of tooth replantation. Various factors such as extra oral time, storage media, infection and endodontic status have been related with the prognosis of replanted tooth. This article reports root resorption in 20 different cases of replantation and evaluates these factors and suggests new treatment philosophy for prevention of such resorption.

The present study was conducted to compare the fracture resistance (compressive strength) of composite resin restorations with and without glass ceramic inserts. A total of 40 unrestored, noncarious, permanent, human mandibular molar teeth were selected. The teeth were divided into two groups. Group A: Teeth with class–I (pit) cavity preparations, restored with Prisma TPH composite resin. Group B: Teeth with class-I (pit) cavity preparations, restored with prisma TPH composite resin and Beta Quartz Glass Ceramic Inserts. The specimens were then subjected to a compressive axial load in a triaxial testing machine. The load required to fracture the restorations was noted for each specimen and calculated in kilograms. Results were derived and observations were made. Group B restorations had a much higher resistance to fracture as compared to Group A restorations When subjected to compressive load. The study showed that compressive strength was significantly increased when a composite resin restoration was done with glass ceramic inserts as compared to without glass ceramic inserts.