Keles Ali, Ahmetoglu Fuat, Ocak Mevlut S, Dayi Burak, Bozkurt Alperen, Orucoglu Hasan
Department of Endodontics, Inonu University, Malatya, Turkiye.
Department of Conservative Dentistry, Inonu University, Malatya, Turkiye.
Eur J Dent. 2014 Jan;8(1):32-37. doi: 10.4103/1305-7456.126237.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the sealing abilities of three different gutta-percha techniques in experimentally defective roots (EDR) and non-defective roots (NR).
Sixty canine teeth were divided into six groups of ten; Group 1, NR + cold lateral condensation (CLC); Group 2, EDR + LC; Group 3, NR + BeeFill; Group 4, EDR + BeeFill; Group 5, NR + Thermafil; and Group 6, EDR + Thermafil. Apical leakage was measured using a computerized fluid filtration meter with a laser system.
Statistical analysis revealed that the CLC demonstrated more microleakage in the EDR than in the NR (P < 0.01). Thermafil demonstrated more microleakage in the NR than in the EDR (P < 0.01). No statistically significant differences were found between the BeeFill groups (P > 0.05).
The results of this study indicate that internal resorptive cavities can affect the apical sealing properties of different root canal filling techniques, with Thermafil ensuring the lowest apical microleakage.
本研究旨在评估三种不同牙胶技术在实验性牙根缺陷（EDR）和无缺陷牙根（NR）中的封闭能力。
60颗犬牙分为6组，每组10颗；第1组，NR + 冷侧方加压充填（CLC）；第2组，EDR + LC；第3组，NR + BeeFill；第4组，EDR + BeeFill；第5组，NR + Thermafil；第6组，EDR + Thermafil。使用带有激光系统的计算机化流体过滤仪测量根尖渗漏。
统计分析显示，CLC在EDR中比在NR中表现出更多的微渗漏（P < 0.01）。Thermafil在NR中比在EDR中表现出更多的微渗漏（P < 0.01）。BeeFill组之间未发现统计学上的显著差异（P > 0.05）。
本研究结果表明，内吸收腔可影响不同根管充填技术的根尖封闭性能，Thermafil确保最低的根尖微渗漏。
