Suppr超能文献

K3、Profile和Protaper器械在模拟弯曲根管中成形能力的比较研究。

A comparative study on the shaping ability of k3, profile and protaper instruments in simulated curved root canals.

作者信息

Suneelkumar Chinni, Savarimalai Karumaran Chellaswamy, Ramachandran Sundararaman, Indira Rajamani, Shankar Padmabhan, Kumar Anil

机构信息

Department of Endodontics, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Narayana Dental College and Hospital, India.

Department of Endodontics, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Ragas Dental College and Hospital, India.

出版信息

Iran Endod J. 2010 Summer;5(3):107-12. Epub 2010 Aug 15.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

The objective of this study was to compare the shaping ability of three rotary filing systems; constant taper K3 instruments, constant taper ProFile instruments and progressive taper ProTaper rotary instruments in clear resin blocks with simulated curved root canals.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty five resin blocks were divided into three groups. Group A preparation was conducted with K3, Group B with ProFile and Group C with ProTaper instruments. Pre and post instrumentation images were superimposed and assessment of the canal shape was completed with a computer image analysis program at 14 levels of the root canal system.

RESULTS

Group A inner and outer curvature pre and post instrumentation values were significantly different (P<0.05) at levels 3; at level 13 only the outer curvature and levels 6, 7, 8 the inner curvature had significantly different values between pre and post instrumentation. Group C had significant P values (P<0.05) at levels 2, 3, 4, 12, 13 in the outer curvature and at levels 6, 7, 8 of the inner curvature.

CONCLUSION

Overall, all three rotary instruments maintained root canal curvatures well. ProTaper instruments significantly removed more resin material from outer canal curvature in the apical third when compared to the other two groups.

摘要

引言

本研究的目的是比较三种旋转锉系统;恒锥度K3器械、恒锥度ProFile器械和渐进锥度ProTaper旋转器械在带有模拟弯曲根管的透明树脂块中的塑形能力。

材料与方法

将45个树脂块分为三组。A组用K3器械进行预备,B组用ProFile器械,C组用ProTaper器械。将预备前和预备后的图像叠加,并使用计算机图像分析程序在根管系统的14个水平处完成根管形态评估。

结果

A组在第3水平处预备前后的内、外曲率值有显著差异(P<0.05);在第13水平处,仅外曲率以及在第6、7、8水平处内曲率在预备前后有显著不同的值。C组在外曲率的第2、3、4、12、13水平处以及内曲率的第6、7、8水平处有显著的P值(P<0.05)。

结论

总体而言,所有三种旋转器械都能很好地保持根管弯曲度。与其他两组相比,ProTaper器械在根尖三分之一处从根管外曲率显著去除了更多的树脂材料。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ab40/4000686/c7a904d5bc85/iej-05-107-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验