Department of Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics, Universitat Internacional de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain.
Int Endod J. 2012 Jun;45(6):542-51. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2011.02008.x. Epub 2012 Jan 20.
To evaluate morphological changes to the major foramen after overinstrumentation with ProTaper Universal and ProFile Vortex Ni-Ti rotary instruments.
Twenty-eight mesiobuccal canals of maxillary and mandibular first molars were divided into two groups of 14 canals each. The root canals were prepared with ProTaper Universal or ProFile Vortex instruments. ProTaper and Vortex instruments were used until the file tip protruded 1 mm beyond the working length (0.5 mm beyond the major foramen). The major foramen was photographed before and after overinstrumentation with each file of the two systems used. The images were superimposed and evaluated using Adobe Photoshop. The parameters evaluated were canal transportation, centring ability and shape of the major foramen. Transportation and centring ability were calculated in two directions: the direction of maximum curvature (MC) and a direction vertical to the maximum curvature (VC). Measurements of canal transportation and centring ability were analysed by anova followed by post hoc least significance difference (LSD) multiple comparisons.
No significant differences were observed amongst the different instruments with respect to centring ability in either direction (P > 0.05). The F3 ProTaper Universal instrument was associated with a higher mean values for transportation in the direction of MC (P < 0.05) than the S1, S2 and F1 ProTaper Universal instruments and the size 15, 0.06 taper, size 20, 0.06 taper, and size 25, 0.06 taper ProFile Vortex instruments. The size 30, 0.06 taper ProFile Vortex instrument had a larger mean value for transportation in the direction of MC (P < 0.05) than the S1 ProTaper Universal and size 15, 0.06 taper ProFile Vortex instruments. The S1, S2, F1, F2 and F3 ProTaper Universal files and the size 15, 0.06 taper, size 20, 0.06 taper, size 25, 0.06 taper, and size 30, 0.06 taper ProFile Vortex files produced an oval foramen in 71%, 71%, 85%, 85%, 71%, 71%, 85%, 85% and 89% of the cases, respectively.
In most samples, the ProTaper Universal and ProFile Vortex files produced transportation of the major foramen and created an oval-shaped major foramen after overinstrumentation.
评估使用 ProTaper Universal 和 ProFile Vortex Ni-Ti 根管锉对磨牙近颊根管过度预备后主要根管口形态的变化。
将 28 个上颌和下颌第一磨牙的近颊根管分为两组，每组 14 个根管。使用 ProTaper Universal 或 ProFile Vortex 根管锉预备根管。当 ProTaper 和 Vortex 锉的尖端超出工作长度（超出主根管口 0.5mm）1mm 时，记录根管预备的情况。使用两种系统的每种锉对根管进行过度预备前后拍摄主根管口的照片。使用 Adobe Photoshop 对图像进行叠加和评估。评价的参数包括根管偏移、根管中心定位能力和主根管口的形态。根管偏移和中心定位能力分别在最大曲率（MC）方向和垂直于最大曲率（VC）方向进行计算。采用方差分析（ANOVA）和 LSD 多重比较后对根管偏移和中心定位能力的测量结果进行分析。
在 MC 方向和 VC 方向，两种系统的不同锉在根管中心定位能力方面无显著差异（P＞0.05）。与 S1、S2 和 F1 号 ProTaper Universal 锉以及 15 号、0.06 锥度、20 号、0.06 锥度和 25 号、0.06 锥度 ProFile Vortex 锉相比，F3 ProTaper Universal 锉在 MC 方向的根管偏移均值较高（P＜0.05）。与 S1 ProTaper Universal 锉和 15 号、0.06 锥度 ProFile Vortex 锉相比，30 号、0.06 锥度 ProFile Vortex 锉在 MC 方向的根管偏移均值较大（P＜0.05）。S1、S2、F1、F2 和 F3 ProTaper Universal 锉以及 15 号、0.06 锥度、20 号、0.06 锥度、25 号、0.06 锥度和 30 号、0.06 锥度 ProFile Vortex 锉分别在 71%、71%、85%、85%、71%、71%、85%、85%和 89%的样本中形成了椭圆形的主根管口。
在大多数样本中，ProTaper Universal 和 ProFile Vortex 锉在过度预备后会导致主根管口的偏移，并形成椭圆形的主根管口。
