Suppr超能文献

单支旋转锉OneShape与往复式F2 Protaper配合Protaper通用序列的清洁效果比较:扫描电子显微镜分析

Comparison of cleaning effectiveness of single rotary file OneShape and reciprocating F2 Protaper with Protaper Universal sequence: A SEM analysis.

作者信息

Saraf Adish A, Patil Anand C, Mangala T M, Mahaparale Rushikesh, Mali Sneha, Pawar Sagar

机构信息

School of Dental Sciences, KIMSDU, Karad, 415539, India.

KLE VK Institute of Dental Sciences, KAHER, Belgavi, 590010, India.

出版信息

J Oral Biol Craniofac Res. 2020 Oct-Dec;10(4):337-342. doi: 10.1016/j.jobcr.2020.06.011. Epub 2020 Jul 3.

Abstract

AIM

This in vitro study intend to compare the cleaning effectiveness of Protaper universal sequence with reciprocating F2 Protaper and single rotary file One shape.

MATERIALS AND METHOD

30 extracted human 1st mandibular molars were chosen for the analysis. Three NiTi file systems were used for mechanical preparation, ProTaper full sequence in rotary motion, single F2 Protaper file used in reciprocating motion, and One shape single file used in a circular motion. Irrigation was carried out after each instrument use using 5 ml of 5% NaOCl followed by normal saline. The root canal surface was evaluated at three different areas (coronal, middle and apical thirds) using Scanning Electron Microscopy. Debris and the Smear layer were evaluated. Data were analyzed statistically using the Friedman test and Kruskal-Wallis test (p ≤ 0.05).

RESULTS

A statistically significant difference (p ≤ 0.05) was observed in the debris score of the Protaper universal group when the 3 thirds of the root were compared. Intergroup comparisons confirmed a statistically significant difference at the coronal and apical third of the roots when debris scores were evaluated. Intragroup comparison for the smear layer demonstrated a statistically significant difference (p ≤ 0.05) at all the 3 levels of the radicular canal for the 3 groups studied. Intergroup comparisons revealed a statistically significant difference (p ≤ 0.05) in the middle and apical 1/3rd when the smear layer was evaluated.

CONCLUSION

The Protaper full sequence group provided better results than Single F2 ProTaper and One shape groups when debris and smear layer removal was investigated.

摘要

目的

本体外研究旨在比较ProTaper通用序列与往复式F2 ProTaper及单支旋转锉One shape的清洁效果。

材料与方法

选取30颗拔除的人类下颌第一磨牙进行分析。使用三种镍钛锉系统进行机械预备,即旋转运动的ProTaper全序列、往复运动的单支F2 ProTaper锉以及圆周运动的One shape单支锉。每次器械使用后,先用5毫升5%的次氯酸钠冲洗,再用生理盐水冲洗。使用扫描电子显微镜在三个不同区域(冠方、中部和根尖三分之一)评估根管表面。评估碎屑和玷污层。数据采用Friedman检验和Kruskal-Wallis检验进行统计学分析(p≤0.05)。

结果

比较牙根的三个三分之一时,ProTaper通用组的碎屑评分存在统计学显著差异(p≤0.05)。评估碎屑评分时,组间比较证实牙根冠方和根尖三分之一处存在统计学显著差异。在所研究的三组中,组内玷污层比较显示在根管的所有三个水平均存在统计学显著差异(p≤0.05)。评估玷污层时,组间比较显示中部和根尖三分之一处存在统计学显著差异(p≤0.05)。

结论

在研究碎屑和玷污层清除情况时,ProTaper全序列组比单支F2 ProTaper组和One shape组效果更好。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

8
Crown-down tip design and shaping.
J Endod. 2003 Aug;29(8):513-8. doi: 10.1097/00004770-200308000-00006.
9
Clinical implications of the smear layer in endodontics: a review.牙髓病学中玷污层的临床意义:综述
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2002 Dec;94(6):658-66. doi: 10.1067/moe.2002.128962.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验