Das Sanjib, Pradhan Prasanti Kumari, Lata S, Sinha Sachidananda Prasad
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Kalinga Institute of Dental Sciences, KIIT University, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India.
J Conserv Dent. 2018 Mar-Apr;21(2):153-156. doi: 10.4103/JCD.JCD_219_17.
The purpose of this study was to compare the incidence of dentinal crack formation after root canal preparation using ProTaper Next, OneShape, and Hyflex electrodischarge machining (HEDM).
A total of 75 extracted mandibular premolars were selected. The root canals were instrumented using ProTaper Next, OneShape, and HEDM rotary files. All roots were horizontally sectioned at 3, 6, and 9 mm from apex with slow-speed saw under water cooling. The sections were observed under a stereomicroscope at ×25 to determine the absence or presence of crack. Data were analyzed using test and one-way ANOVA.
ProTaper Next and HEDM produced significantly less cracks than OneShape.
Within the limitation of this study, it can be concluded that nickel-titanium instruments may cause cracks on the root surface. ProTaper Next and HEDM tend to produce less number of cracks as compared to OneShape.
本研究的目的是比较使用ProTaper Next、OneShape和Hyflex放电加工(HEDM)进行根管预备后牙本质裂纹形成的发生率。
共选取75颗拔除的下颌前磨牙。使用ProTaper Next、OneShape和HEDM旋转锉对根管进行预备。所有牙根在水下冷却条件下用慢速锯从根尖3、6和9mm处水平剖切。在体视显微镜下以×25放大倍数观察切片,以确定是否存在裂纹。使用检验和单因素方差分析对数据进行分析。
ProTaper Next和HEDM产生的裂纹明显少于OneShape。
在本研究的局限性范围内,可以得出结论,镍钛器械可能会导致牙根表面出现裂纹。与OneShape相比,ProTaper Next和HEDM产生的裂纹数量往往较少。