Khoshbin Elham, Shokri Abbas, Donyavi Zakieh, Shahriari Shahriar, Salehimehr Golsa, Farhadian Maryam, Kavandi Zeinab
Assistant Professor, Department of Endodontics, Dental School, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran.
Assistant Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Dental School, Dental Research Center, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran.
J Clin Exp Dent. 2017 Aug 1;9(8):e939-e944. doi: 10.4317/jced.52977. eCollection 2017 Aug.
This study sought to compare the root canal debridement ability of Neolix, Reciproc and ProTaper rotary systems in long oval-shaped root canals.
Eighty five extracted single-rooted human teeth with long oval-shaped single root canals were selected and divided into three experimental groups(n=25) and one control group (n= 10). Root canals were filled with Vitapex radiopaque contrast medium and prepared with Neolix, Reciproc or ProTaper systems. The control group only received irrigation. Digital radiographs were obtained at baseline and postoperatively and subjected to digital subtraction. The percentage of reduction in contrast medium was quantified at 0-5 mm and 5-10 mm distances from the apex. The data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and t-test.
The mean percentage of the contrast medium removed was not significantly different in the 0-5mm segment among the three groups (=0.6). In the 5-10mm segment a significant difference was found in this regard among the ProTaper and Reciproc groups (=0.02) and the highest mean percentage of contrast medium was removed by ProTaper. But, difference between ProTaper and Neolix as well as Neolix and Reciproc was not significant. In Neolix (=0.024) and Reciproc (=0.002) systems, the mean percentage of the contrast medium removed from the 0-5mm segment was significantly greater than that in 5-10mm segment; however, this difference was not significant in ProTaper group (=0.069).
Neolix single-file system may be a suitable alternative to ProTaper multiple-file system in debridement of long oval shaped canals. Root Canal Preparation, Debridement, Root Canal Therapy.
本研究旨在比较Neolix、Reciproc和ProTaper旋转系统在长椭圆形根管中的根管清创能力。
选取85颗拔除的单根人牙，其根管为长椭圆形单根管，分为三个实验组（n = 25）和一个对照组（n = 10）。根管内充满Vitapex不透光造影剂，分别用Neolix、Reciproc或ProTaper系统进行预备。对照组仅进行冲洗。在基线和术后获取数字化根尖片并进行数字减影。在距根尖0 - 5mm和5 - 10mm处对造影剂减少的百分比进行量化。数据采用单因素方差分析和t检验进行分析。
三组在根尖0 - 5mm节段造影剂清除的平均百分比差异无统计学意义（P = 0.6）。在根尖5 - 10mm节段，ProTaper组和Reciproc组在这方面存在显著差异（P = 0.02），ProTaper组清除造影剂的平均百分比最高。但是，ProTaper组与Neolix组以及Neolix组与Reciproc组之间的差异无统计学意义。在Neolix系统（P = 0.024）和Reciproc系统（P = 0.002）中，根尖0 - 5mm节段造影剂清除的平均百分比显著高于5 - 10mm节段；然而，在ProTaper组中这种差异无统计学意义（P = 0.069）。
在长椭圆形根管清创方面，Neolix单根管系统可能是ProTaper多根管系统的合适替代方案。根管预备、清创、根管治疗。
