Suppr超能文献

硅酸钙基封闭剂的呈现形式会影响牙本质封闭吗?一项关于小管渗透的体外共聚焦激光研究。

Could the Calcium Silicate-Based Sealer Presentation Form Influence Dentinal Sealing? An In Vitro Confocal Laser Study on Tubular Penetration.

作者信息

Muedra Paula, Forner Leopoldo, Lozano Adrián, Sanz José L, Rodríguez-Lozano Francisco J, Guerrero-Gironés Julia, Riccitiello Francesco, Spagnuolo Gianrico, Llena Carmen

机构信息

Department of Stomatology, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Universitat de València, 46010 Valencia, Spain.

Department of Dermatology, Stomatology, Radiology and Physical Medicine, Morales Meseguer Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, University of Murcia, 30100 Murcia, Spain.

出版信息

Materials (Basel). 2021 Jan 31;14(3):659. doi: 10.3390/ma14030659.

Abstract

Dentinal tubule penetration influences root canal treatment sealing. The aim of this study was to compare dentinal penetration of two clinical presentations of silicate-based sealers using confocal laser. Sixty single-rooted human teeth from 50-70 year-old patients extracted for orthodontic/periodontal reasons were used. Canals were prepared using Mtwo system up to 35/0.04, with 5.25% NaOCl irrigation and final irrigation using 17% EDTA. Teeth were randomly assigned into study groups (n = 20): EndoSequence BC sealer (ES, group 1), BioRoot RCS (BR, group 2); and a control group (n = 20) with AH Plus (AHP). Root canals were obturated with 35/0.04 gutta-percha (single-cone technique). The samples were obtained from apical, middle, and coronal thirds. Dentinal tubule penetration depth and percentage of penetration around the canal perimeter were measured. The statistical analysis was performed using Mann Whitney U test and Wilcoxon -test (95% confidence interval). ES exhibited a significantly higher penetration than AHP in apical and middle thirds ( < 0.05), and in middle and coronal thirds relative to BR ( < 0.05). The percentage of penetration around the canal perimeter was significantly higher for ES compared to BR in all thirds, but only in the apical third for AHP ( < 0.05). The pre-mixed silicate-based sealer exhibited better penetration than the powder/liquid one.

摘要

牙本质小管的渗透会影响根管治疗的封闭效果。本研究的目的是使用共聚焦激光比较两种基于硅酸盐的封闭剂在临床上的牙本质渗透情况。使用了因正畸/牙周原因拔除的50至70岁患者的60颗单根人牙。根管采用Mtwo系统预备至35/0.04,用5.25%的次氯酸钠冲洗,最后用17%的乙二胺四乙酸冲洗。牙齿被随机分为研究组(n = 20):EndoSequence BC封闭剂(ES,第1组)、BioRoot RCS(BR,第2组);以及一个使用AH Plus(AHP)的对照组(n = 20)。根管采用35/0.04牙胶尖进行充填(单尖技术)。样本取自根尖、中部和冠部三分之一处。测量牙本质小管的渗透深度以及根管周围的渗透百分比。使用曼-惠特尼U检验和威尔科克森检验(95%置信区间)进行统计分析。在根尖和中部三分之一处,ES的渗透明显高于AHP(P < 0.05),在中部和冠部三分之一处,相对于BR,ES的渗透也明显更高(P < 0.05)。在所有三分之一处,ES在根管周围的渗透百分比相对于BR都明显更高,但对于AHP,仅在根尖三分之一处如此(P < 0.05)。预混合的基于硅酸盐的封闭剂比粉/液型封闭剂表现出更好的渗透性。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7beb/7867024/7f58b8458043/materials-14-00659-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验