Suppr超能文献

两种儿童旋转锉系统与手动器械在乳磨牙根管治疗中应用的比较:一项离体锥形束 CT 研究。

Comparison of two pediatric rotary file systems and hand instrumentation in primary molar: An ex vivo cone-beam computed tomographic study.

机构信息

Lecturer of Pediatric Dentistry and Dental Public Health, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Al-Azhar University Assiut Branch, Egypt; Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Vision College for Dentistry and Nursing, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.

Department of Diagnostic Oral Sciences, King Abdulaziz University, Faculty of Dentistry, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.

出版信息

Niger J Clin Pract. 2021 Oct;24(10):1492-1498. doi: 10.4103/njcp.njcp_563_20.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Pulpal involvement, secondary to dental caries, is not uncommon and is a challenging task for pediatric dentists. Morphological differences in root canal of deciduous teeth increases the complexity of management. The aim of this study was to compare two rotary file systems and hand instrumentation for root canal preparation in regard to canal transportation, centering ability ratio, and dentin thickness using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT).

METHODS

A total of 72 canals from 24 freshly extracted mandibular deciduous second molars were divided into a set of 8 teeth, then prepared using 2 rotary files systems: the Kedo-S pediatric file system (Group A) and Pro AF Baby Gold file system (Group B) were compared to hand instrumentation (Group C). CBCT scans before and after root canal preparation were used to evaluate tested parameters. Instrumentation time for all three techniques was also measured using a chronometer.

RESULTS

Although rotary file systems have shown superior results in root canal preparation as compared to hand instrumentation, no significant differences were observed between all the groups for canal transportation and dentin thickness at all three levels of prepared canals. A comparison of centering ability ratio between all the groups was found to be statistically significant only at the cervical level. A significant difference was observed between hand instrumentation using K-files (117.3 s) and both rotary systems (Kedo-S (81 s) and Pro AF Baby Gold (81.5 s)) in terms of canal preparation time (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Both tested rotary systems and hand instrumentation demonstrated comparable canal preparation results, with differences that were statistically non-significant in most tested parameters, without shaping errors. However, both the rotary systems were more efficient and faster than hand instrumentation.

摘要

背景

由龋齿引起的牙髓病变并不少见,这对儿童牙医来说是一项具有挑战性的任务。乳牙根管的形态学差异增加了管理的复杂性。本研究的目的是使用锥形束 CT(CBCT)比较两种旋转锉系统和手动器械在根管制备方面的根管偏移、中心能力比和牙本质厚度。

方法

将 24 颗新鲜拔除的下颌乳第二磨牙的 72 个根管分为一组 8 颗牙,然后使用 2 种旋转锉系统进行制备:Kedo-S 儿科锉系统(A 组)和 Pro AF Baby Gold 锉系统(B 组)与手动器械(C 组)进行比较。使用 CBCT 扫描在根管预备前后评估测试参数。使用记时器测量所有三种技术的器械时间。

结果

虽然旋转锉系统在根管预备方面的效果优于手动器械,但在所有三个预备根管水平的根管偏移和牙本质厚度方面,三组之间没有显著差异。对所有组的中心能力比进行比较发现,仅在颈部水平具有统计学意义。与手动器械(K 锉)(117.3 s)相比,两种旋转系统(Kedo-S(81 s)和 Pro AF Baby Gold(81.5 s))在根管预备时间方面差异有统计学意义(P <0.001)。

结论

两种测试的旋转系统和手动器械都显示出可比较的根管预备结果,在大多数测试参数中,差异无统计学意义,没有成形误差。然而,两种旋转系统都比手动器械更有效率和更快。

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