Geminiani Alessandro, Abdel-Azim Tamer, Ercoli Carlo, Feng Changyong, Meirelles Luiz, Massironi Domenico
Assistant Professor, Division of Prosthodontics, Eastman Institute for Oral Health, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY.
Assistant Professor, Division of Prosthodontics, University of Louisville, Louisville, Ky.
J Prosthet Dent. 2014 Jul;112(1):51-8. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.02.007. Epub 2014 Apr 14.
Rotary and nonrotary cutting instruments are used to produce specific characteristics on the axial and marginal surfaces of teeth being prepared for fixed restorations. Oscillating instruments have been suggested for tooth preparation, but no comparative surface roughness data are available.
To compare the surface roughness of simulated tooth preparations produced by oscillating instruments versus rotary cutting instruments with turbine and electric handpieces.
Different grit rotary cutting instruments were used to prepare Macor specimens (n=36) with 2 handpieces. The surface roughness obtained with rotary cutting instruments was compared with that produced by oscillating cutting instruments. The instruments used were as follows: coarse, then fine-grit rotary cutting instruments with a turbine (group CFT) or an electric handpiece (group CFE); coarse, then medium-grit rotary cutting instruments with a turbine (group CMT) or an electric handpiece (group CME); coarse-grit rotary cutting instruments with a turbine handpiece and oscillating instruments at a low-power (group CSL) or high-power setting (group CSH). A custom testing apparatus was used to test all instruments. The average roughness was measured for each specimen with a 3-dimensional optical surface profiler and compared with 1-way ANOVA and the Tukey honestly significant difference post hoc test for multiple comparisons (α=.05).
Oscillating cutting instruments produced surface roughness values similar to those produced by similar grit rotary cutting instruments with a turbine handpiece. The electric handpiece produced smoother surfaces than the turbine regardless of rotary cutting instrument grit.
Rotary cutting instruments with electric handpieces produced the smoothest surface, whereas the same instruments used with a turbine and oscillating instruments achieved similar surface roughness.
旋转式和非旋转式切割器械用于在为固定修复体准备的牙齿的轴向和边缘表面上产生特定特征。有人建议使用振荡器械进行牙齿预备，但尚无比较表面粗糙度的数据。
比较振荡器械与带涡轮和电动手机的旋转切割器械所制备的模拟牙齿预备体的表面粗糙度。
使用不同粒度的旋转切割器械，通过两种手机制备Macor标本（n = 36）。将旋转切割器械获得的表面粗糙度与振荡切割器械产生的表面粗糙度进行比较。使用的器械如下：粗粒度，然后是带涡轮手机（CFT组）或电动手机（CFE组）的细粒度旋转切割器械；粗粒度，然后是带涡轮手机（CMT组）或电动手机（CME组）的中粒度旋转切割器械；带涡轮手机的粗粒度旋转切割器械和低功率（CSL组）或高功率设置（CSH组）的振荡器械。使用定制的测试设备测试所有器械。用三维光学表面轮廓仪测量每个标本的平均粗糙度，并通过单因素方差分析和用于多重比较的Tukey真实显著差异事后检验进行比较（α = 0.05）。
振荡切割器械产生的表面粗糙度值与带涡轮手机的类似粒度旋转切割器械产生的表面粗糙度值相似。无论旋转切割器械的粒度如何，电动手机产生的表面都比涡轮手机更光滑。
带电动手机的旋转切割器械产生的表面最光滑，而与涡轮手机和振荡器械一起使用的相同器械获得的表面粗糙度相似。
