Suppr超能文献

评价几种镍钛系统在根管再治疗中根管内碎屑的推出情况。

Evaluation of apically extruded debris during root canal retreatment with several NiTi systems.

机构信息

Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Bezmialem Vakıf University, İstanbul, Turkey.

Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Trakya University, Edirne, Turkey.

出版信息

Int Endod J. 2015 Dec;48(12):1194-8. doi: 10.1111/iej.12425. Epub 2015 Jan 19.

Abstract

AIM

To compare the amount of debris extruded apically during root canal retreatment using ProTaper, Mtwo and Reciproc instruments with hand H-files.

METHODOLOGY

In total, 60 freshly extracted human mandibular incisor teeth were used. All root canals were prepared with a Reciproc R25 file than filled with Gutta-percha and AH Plus sealer using cold lateral condensation before being assigned randomly to four groups (n = 15 each). In group 1, root fillings were removed with the Protaper Universal retreatment system; ProTaper Universal F3 and F4 instruments were used for the final preparation. In group 2, root fillings were removed with the Mtwo retreatment system; Mtwo size 30, .06 taper, size 35, .06 taper and size 40, .06 taper files were used for the final preparation. In group 3, root fillings were removed with Reciproc R25 instruments; Reciproc R40 instruments were used for the final preparation. In group 4, the root fillings were removed with Gates Glidden burs and sizes 35, 30 and 25 H-files; for final preparation, a size 40 H-file was used. Glass vials were used for debris collection. The vials were weighed before and after Gutta-percha removal. Additionally, the times required for the retreatment procedures were recorded. Data were analysed statistically using one-way analysis of variance.

RESULTS

The Reciproc system produced significantly smaller amounts of apical extruded debris than the other groups (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference between the Mtwo, H-file and ProTaper groups. The ProTaper and Reciproc groups required significantly less time than the Mtwo and H-file groups (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of the reciprocating single file system resulted in the extrusion of significantly less debris compared with the full-sequence rotary NiTi instruments and hand filing. Use of the ProTaper and Reciproc instruments required less time for retreatment procedures than use of the Mtwo or H-file.

摘要

目的

比较 Protaper、Mtwo 和 Reciproc 机用镍钛锉与手动 H 锉在根管再治疗时根尖挤出物的量。

方法

共使用 60 颗新鲜下颌切牙。所有根管均用 Reciproc R25 锉预备,冷侧压法充填牙胶尖和 AH Plus 根管封闭剂,然后随机分为四组(每组 15 个)。在第 1 组中,用 Protaper 全能根管再治疗系统去除根充物;用 Protaper Universal F3 和 F4 锉进行最终预备。在第 2 组中,用 Mtwo 根管再治疗系统去除根充物;用 Mtwo 30 号、0.06 锥度、35 号、0.06 锥度和 40 号、0.06 锥度锉进行最终预备。在第 3 组中,用 Reciproc R25 锉去除根充物;用 Reciproc R40 锉进行最终预备。在第 4 组中,用 Gates Glidden 车针和 35、30 和 25 号 H 锉去除根充物;用 40 号 H 锉进行最终预备。玻璃小瓶用于收集碎屑。在去除牙胶前和后称重小瓶。此外,还记录了再治疗程序所需的时间。数据采用单因素方差分析进行统计学分析。

结果

Reciproc 系统产生的根尖挤出物明显少于其他组(P<0.05)。Mtwo、H 锉和 Protaper 组之间无显著差异。与 Mtwo 和 H 锉组相比,Protaper 和 Reciproc 组的再治疗时间明显缩短(P<0.001)。

结论

与全序列镍钛锉和手动锉相比,使用往复式单锉系统可显著减少碎屑的挤出。与 Mtwo 或 H 锉相比,使用 Protaper 和 Reciproc 锉进行再治疗程序所需的时间更少。

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