Kumar Tarun, Mittal Sunandan, Keshav Vanita, Kaur Ramanjot, Maakhni Ena
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Dasmesh Institute of Research and Dental Sciences, Faridkot, Punjab, India.
J Conserv Dent. 2022 Jan-Feb;25(1):32-36. doi: 10.4103/jcd.jcd_373_21. Epub 2022 May 2.
The aim of the study is to compare and evaluate the remaining dentin thickness following biomechanical preparation of teeth using different rotary file systems.
Sixty noncarious mandibular premolar teeth were collected and decoronated at the level of cementoenamel junction with a diamond disc. All specimens were randomly divided into 5 experimental groups - ProTaper Next (Dentsply Mallifer), Mtwo (VDW, Antaeus, Munich, Germany), RaCe (FKG, La Chaux-de-Fonds, Switzerland), Hyflex electro-discharge machining (EDM) (Coltene-Whaledent, Allstetten, Switzerland), NeoNiTi (Neolix, France) and 1 control group of 10 teeth each. After mounting the samples on a modeling wax sheet, preoperative cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans were taken. Biomechanical preparation of canals was done following the assigned protocol of manufacturers. Postoperative CBCT scans were taken and comparison was carried out with preoperative scans.
Difference among the groups was analyzed by Turkey and analysis of variance tests. A < 0.05 was considered statistically significant for all tests.
A comparison of preinstrumentation and postinstrumentation CBCT images revealed ProTaper Next group to remove more dentin at 7 mm as opposed to other groups in mesiodistal direction. However, no statistical difference was evident between ProTaper Next, MTwo, Race, Hyflex EDM, NeoNiTi file systems at 3 mm, 5 mm, and 7 mm in buccolingual direction. A statistically nonsignificant difference was evident between MTwo, Race, Hyflex EDM, NeoNiTi file systems at 3 mm, 5 mm, and 7 mm in both mesiodistal and buccolingual direction.
Race file system performed better and removed lesser dentin in both buccolingual and mesiodistal directions. More dentin was removed at the coronal in mesiodistal direction with the use of ProTaper Next, and significant difference was seen between Protaper Next group and other groups in the study.
本研究旨在比较和评估使用不同旋转锉系统对牙齿进行生物力学预备后剩余牙本质的厚度。
收集60颗非龋性下颌前磨牙，用金刚石盘在牙釉质牙骨质界水平去冠。所有标本随机分为5个实验组——ProTaper Next（登士柏马利费尔）、Mtwo（VDW，德国慕尼黑安泰俄斯）、RaCe（FKG，瑞士拉绍德封）、Hyflex电火花加工（EDM）（科尔tene-Whaledent，瑞士阿尔斯泰滕）、NeoNiTi（Neolix，法国），以及1个对照组，每组10颗牙。将样本固定在模型蜡片上后，进行术前锥形束计算机断层扫描（CBCT）。按照制造商指定的方案对根管进行生物力学预备。术后进行CBCT扫描，并与术前扫描进行比较。
采用Turkey检验和方差分析来分析组间差异。所有检验中，P < 0.05被认为具有统计学意义。
术前和术后CBCT图像比较显示，ProTaper Next组在近远中方向7mm处去除的牙本质比其他组更多。然而，在颊舌方向3mm、5mm和7mm处，ProTaper Next、Mtwo、Race、Hyflex EDM、NeoNiTi锉系统之间没有明显的统计学差异。在近远中和颊舌方向3mm、5mm和7mm处，Mtwo、Race、Hyflex EDM、NeoNiTi锉系统之间存在统计学上不显著的差异。
Race锉系统在颊舌向和近远中向的表现更好，去除的牙本质更少。使用ProTaper Next在近远中方向的冠部去除的牙本质更多，且ProTaper Next组与本研究中的其他组之间存在显著差异。
