Govindaraju Lavanya, Jeevanandan Ganesh, Subramanian Emg
Postgraduate Student, Department of Paediatric and Preventive Dentistry, Saveetha Dental College, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
Senior Lecturer, Department of Paediatric and Preventive Dentistry, Saveetha Dental College, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
J Clin Diagn Res. 2017 Sep;11(9):ZC55-ZC58. doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2017/30069.10602. Epub 2017 Sep 1.
Pulp therapy in primary teeth has been performed using various instrumentation techniques. However, the conventional instrumentation technique used for root canal preparation in primary teeth is hand instrumentation. Various Nickel-Titanium (Ni-Ti) instruments are available to perform efficient root canal preparation in primary teeth. These Ni-Ti instruments has been designed to aid in better root canal preparation in permanent teeth but are rarely used in primary teeth. It is necessary to assess the feasibility of using these adult rotary files with a modified sequence in primary teeth.
To compare the quality of obturation and instrumentation time during root canal preparation using hand files and modified rotary file systems in primary molars.
Forty-five primary mandibular molars were randomly assigned to three experimental groups (n=15). Group I was instrumented using k-hand files, Group II with S2 ProTaper universal file and Group III with 0.25 tip 4% taper K3 rotary file. Standardized digital radiographs were taken before and after root canal instrumentation. Root canal preparation time was also recorded. Statistical analysis of the obtained data was done using SPSS Software version 17.0. An intergroup comparison of the instrumentation time and the quality of obturation was done using ANOVA and Chi-square test with the level of significance set at 0.05.
No significant differences were noted with regard to the quality of obturation (p=0.791). However, a statistically significant difference was noted in the instrumentation time between the three groups (p<0.05). ProTaper rotary system had significantly lesser instrumentation time when compared to that of K3 rotary system and hand file system.
The hand files, S2 ProTaper Universal and K3 0.25 tip 4% taper files systems performed similarly with respect to the quality of obturation. There was a significant difference in instrumentation time with manual instrumentation compared to the modified rotary file systems in primary teeth.
乳牙牙髓治疗已采用多种器械操作技术。然而,乳牙根管预备常用的传统器械操作技术是手工器械操作。有多种镍钛(Ni-Ti)器械可用于乳牙的高效根管预备。这些Ni-Ti器械设计用于辅助恒牙进行更好的根管预备,但很少用于乳牙。有必要评估在乳牙中使用这些成人旋转锉并采用改良顺序的可行性。
比较在乳牙磨牙根管预备过程中使用手动锉和改良旋转锉系统时的充填质量和器械操作时间。
45颗下颌乳牙磨牙随机分为三个实验组(n = 15)。第一组使用k型手动锉进行器械操作,第二组使用S2 ProTaper通用锉,第三组使用尖端0.25、锥度4%的K3旋转锉。在根管器械操作前后拍摄标准化数字X线片。同时记录根管预备时间。使用SPSS 17.0软件对所得数据进行统计分析。采用方差分析和卡方检验对器械操作时间和充填质量进行组间比较,显著性水平设定为0.05。
在充填质量方面未观察到显著差异(p = 0.791)。然而,三组之间在器械操作时间上存在统计学显著差异(p < 0.05)。与K3旋转系统和手动锉系统相比,ProTaper旋转系统的器械操作时间明显更短。
手动锉、S2 ProTaper通用锉和K3 0.25尖端4%锥度锉系统在充填质量方面表现相似。与乳牙改良旋转锉系统相比,手动器械操作在器械操作时间上存在显著差异。