Duque Jussaro Alves, Vivan Rodrigo Ricci, Cavenago Bruno Cavalini, Amoroso-Silva Pablo Andrés, Bernardes Ricardo Affonso, Vasconcelos Bruno Carvalho de, Duarte Marco Antonio Hungaro
Universidade de São Paulo, Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru, Departamento de Dentística, Endodontia e Materiais Odontológicos, Bauru, SP, Brasil.
Universidade Federal do Paraná, Departamento de Odontologia, Curitiba, PR, Brasil.
J Appl Oral Sci. 2017 Jan-Feb;25(1):27-33. doi: 10.1590/1678-77572016-0230.
This study aimed to evaluate the influence of the NiTi wire in Conventional NiTi (ProTaper Universal PTU) and Controlled Memory NiTi (ProTaper Gold PTG) instrument systems on the quality of root canal preparation.
Twelve mandibular molars with separate mesial canals were scanned using a high-definition microcomputed tomography system. The PTU and PTG instruments were used to shape twelve mesial canals each. The canals were scanned after preparation with F2 and F3 instruments of the PTU and PTG systems. The analyzed parameters included the remaining dentin thickness at the apical and cervical levels, root canal volume and untouched canal walls. Data was analyzed for statistical significance by the Friedman and Dunn's tests. For the comparison of data between groups, the Mann-Whitney test was used.
In the pre-operative analysis, there were no statistically significant differences between the groups in terms of the area and volume of root canals (P>.05). There was also no statistically significant difference between the systems with respect to root canal volume after use of the F2 and F3 instruments. There was no statistical difference in the dentin thickness at the first apical level between, before and after instrumentation for both systems. At the 3 cervical levels, the PTG maintained centralization of the preparation on the transition between the F2 and F3 instruments, which did not occur with the PTU. Conclusion The Conventional NiTi (PTU) and Controlled Memory NiTi (PTG) instruments displayed comparable capabilities for shaping the straight mesial root canals of mandibular molars, although the PTG was better than the PTU at maintaining the centralization of the shape in the cervical portion.
本研究旨在评估传统镍钛合金(ProTaper Universal PTU)和可控记忆镍钛合金(ProTaper Gold PTG)器械系统中的镍钛丝对根管预备质量的影响。
使用高清微型计算机断层扫描系统对12颗具有独立近中根管的下颌磨牙进行扫描。分别使用PTU和PTG器械对12个近中根管进行预备。在用PTU和PTG系统的F2和F3器械预备后对根管进行扫描。分析的参数包括根尖和颈部水平的剩余牙本质厚度、根管容积和未触及的根管壁。通过Friedman检验和Dunn检验分析数据的统计学意义。对于组间数据比较,使用Mann-Whitney检验。
在术前分析中,两组在根管面积和容积方面无统计学显著差异(P>0.05)。在使用F2和F3器械后,两种系统在根管容积方面也无统计学显著差异。两种系统在器械操作前后,根尖第一个水平的牙本质厚度均无统计学差异。在3个颈部水平,PTG在F2和F3器械过渡时保持预备的中心化,而PTU则未出现这种情况。结论 传统镍钛合金(PTU)和可控记忆镍钛合金(PTG)器械在塑造下颌磨牙直的近中根管方面显示出相当的能力,尽管PTG在保持颈部形状的中心化方面优于PTU。