Department of Endodontics, School of Dentistry, State University of Rio de Janeiro (UERJ), Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.
Nuclear Engineering Program, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.
Int Endod J. 2020 Dec;53(12):1680-1688. doi: 10.1111/iej.13384. Epub 2020 Sep 15.
To evaluate the use of a reduced taper endodontic instrument system (Bassi Logic™ .03 taper) and expandable heat-treated system (XP-endo Shaper) on the ability to shape canals in mandibular molars, by means of microcomputed tomography (micro-CT) analysis. The Reciproc system was used as the reference for comparison.
Twenty-four mandibular molars were scanned in a micro-CT, matched based on similar anatomical features and sorted into three groups (n = 8 per group), according to root canal preparation system: Bassi Logic™ .03, XP-endo Shaper and Reciproc. The teeth were mounted onto a mannequin and the pulp chambers were accessed with traditional access cavities. In Bassi Logic™ .03 and Reciproc groups, mesial canals were prepared with size 25, .03 taper or R25 (size 25, .08v taper) instruments and the distal root canal with size 25, .03 taper and size 40, .03 taper or R25 and R40 (size 40, .06v taper), respectively. In XP-endo Shaper groups, all root canals were prepared with XP-endo Shaper (size 30, .04v taper). After root canal preparation, the teeth were rescanned. The percentage of untouched canal areas and the percentage of removed dentine were evaluated separately for mesial and distal root canals. The data were analysed using one-way anova and Tukey tests (P < 0.05).
The Bassi Logic™ .03 group was associated with a greater percentage of untouched canal areas when compared to XP-endo Shaper and Reciproc groups for mesial and distal root canals (P < 0.05), but no differences were found between XP-endo Shaper and Reciproc groups (P > 0.05). No significant difference was observed in the percentage of dentine removed amongst the groups for mesial and distal root canals (P > 0.05).
The use of a reduced taper system (Bassi Logic™ .03) during root canal preparation resulted in a greater percentage of untouched canal areas when compared to XP-endo Shaper and Reciproc instruments. No differences were observed amongst the systems regarding the percentage of dentine removed.
通过微计算机断层扫描（micro-CT）分析，评估使用小锥度根管预备器械系统（Bassi Logic™.03 锥度）和可扩张热处理系统（XP-endo Shaper）在下颌磨牙根管成形能力上的差异。Reciproc 系统被用作比较的参考。
24 颗下颌磨牙在 micro-CT 中进行扫描，根据类似的解剖特征进行匹配，并根据根管预备系统分为三组（每组 8 颗）：Bassi Logic™.03、XP-endo Shaper 和 Reciproc。牙齿安装在仿头模上，通过传统的开髓口进入牙髓腔。在 Bassi Logic™.03 和 Reciproc 组中，用 25 号、.03 锥度的器械预备近中根管，用 25 号、.03 锥度和 40 号、.03 锥度的器械预备远中根管。在 XP-endo Shaper 组中，所有根管均用 XP-endo Shaper（30 号、.04v 锥度）预备。根管预备后，再次扫描牙齿。分别评估近中和远中根管的未预备根管区域百分比和去除牙本质百分比。使用单因素方差分析和 Tukey 检验（P<0.05）对数据进行分析。
与 XP-endo Shaper 和 Reciproc 组相比，Bassi Logic™.03 组在近中和远中根管中未预备根管区域的百分比更大（P<0.05），但 XP-endo Shaper 和 Reciproc 组之间无差异（P>0.05）。各组近中和远中根管牙本质去除百分比无显著差异（P>0.05）。
与 XP-endo Shaper 和 Reciproc 器械相比，根管预备时使用小锥度系统（Bassi Logic™.03）会导致未预备根管区域的百分比更大。在牙本质去除百分比方面，各系统之间无差异。
