Anantula Kavitha, Ganta Anil Kumar
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Kamineni Institute of Dental Sciences, Andhra Pradesh, India.
J Conserv Dent. 2011 Jan;14(1):57-61. doi: 10.4103/0972-0707.80748.
To evaluate and compare the sealing ability between the conventional cold lateral condensation technique and two different obturating techniques - Obtura II and GuttaFlow under a stereomicroscope at 40× magnification.
Sixty single-rooted teeth were selected and the canals were shaped with ProTaper rotary files. Irrigation was performed with 5% sodium hypochlorite and 17% EDTA. The teeth were then separated into three groups depending on the type of obturation technique. Group A (n = 20) - obturated using the Lateral condensation technique and AHplus sealer, Group B (n = 20) - obturated with Obtura II injection-molded thermoplasticized technique and AHplus sealer, and Group C (n = 20) obturated using GuttaFlow. After storing the teeth in 100% humidity for seven days at 37°C, the roots of the teeth were sectioned at five levels. The sections were then observed under a stereomicroscope at 40 × magnification and the images were analyzed for area of voids (AV) and frequency of voids.
The data was statistically analyzed using the SPSS version 17 software. The 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. One-way analysis of variance with post-hoc test and non-parametric Mann-Whitney U test was carried out, to compare the means.
The lowest mean of AV was recorded in the Obtura II group, 1.0% (95% CI = 0.5 - 1.5). This was statistically and significantly different from the GuttaFlow group, 3.0% (95% CI = 2.1 - 3.9). There was no significant difference between the Obtura II group and the lateral condensation group, 1.6% (95% CI= 1.0 - 2.2) with regard to the area of voids, but there was a statistically significant difference between the Lateral condensation and GuttaFlow groups. The GuttaFlow group showed the maximum number of voids, 56% (95% CI = 48 - 64), which was significantly higher than those in the lateral condensation, 26% (95% CI= 19 - 34), and Obtura II, 15% (95% CI= 10 - 21) groups.
The Obtura II technique utilizing the injection-molded thermoplasticized gutta-percha had better adaptability to the canal walls when compared to the GuttaFlow obturation and lateral condensation techniques.
在40倍放大倍数的体视显微镜下评估并比较传统冷侧方加压技术与两种不同的充填技术——Obtura II和GuttaFlow之间的封闭能力。
选取60颗单根牙,用ProTaper旋转锉对根管进行预备。用5%次氯酸钠和17%乙二胺四乙酸进行冲洗。然后根据充填技术类型将牙齿分为三组。A组(n = 20)——采用侧方加压技术和AHplus封闭剂进行充填,B组(n = 20)——采用Obtura II注射成型热塑牙胶技术和AHplus封闭剂进行充填,C组(n = 20)采用GuttaFlow进行充填。将牙齿在37°C、100%湿度下储存7天后,在五个水平对牙根进行切片。然后在40倍放大倍数的体视显微镜下观察切片,并对图像进行孔隙面积(AV)和孔隙频率分析。
使用SPSS 17.0软件对数据进行统计分析。计算95%置信区间(CI)。进行单因素方差分析及事后检验和非参数曼-惠特尼U检验,以比较均值。
Obtura II组的AV均值最低,为1.0%(95% CI = 0.5 - 1.5)。这在统计学上与GuttaFlow组有显著差异,GuttaFlow组为3.0%(95% CI = 2.1 - 3.9)。Obtura II组与侧方加压组在孔隙面积方面无显著差异,侧方加压组为1.6%(95% CI = 1.0 - 2.2),但侧方加压组与GuttaFlow组之间存在统计学显著差异。GuttaFlow组的孔隙数量最多,为56%(95% CI = 48 - 64),显著高于侧方加压组的26%(95% CI = 19 - 34)和Obtura II组的15%(95% CI = 10 - 21)。
与GuttaFlow充填技术和侧方加压技术相比,采用注射成型热塑牙胶的Obtura II技术对根管壁的适应性更好。