Huang Pai-Chun, Wu Yi-Ting, Hsu Yung-Hao, Liao Szu-Chin, Wang Ya-Hsuan, Gutmann James L, Huang Haw-Ming, Hsieh Sung-Chih
School of Dentistry, College of Oral Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Department of Dentistry, Taipei Municipal Wan-Fang Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
J Dent Sci. 2023 Jan;18(1):414-419. doi: 10.1016/j.jds.2022.08.014. Epub 2022 Sep 2.
BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: In the warm gutta-percha technique, soft-type and regular-type gutta-percha are using for backfilling thermoplasticized injection system. However, there are limited reports about the properties of these backfilling gutta-percha. This study aimed to analyze and compare the composition, thermal behavior and compact force of two types of backfilling gutta-percha.
Soft-type and regular-type backfilling gutta-percha (B&L BioTech, Fairfax, VA, USA) were investigated. The inorganic and organic fractions of these gutta-perchas were separated by quantitative chemical analysis (n = 6). Their composition was analyzed using energy dispersive spectroscopy. Thermal behavior in response to temperature variations was analyzed using differential scanning calorimetry. Additionally, a compaction model was used to investigate the relation between compaction force and temperature (n = 10).
The soft-type contained more gutta-percha (3.69-5.85%), carbon ratio (38.96-48.52%) and less inorganic substance (86.51-90.45%), zinc ratio (29.36-35.67%). The composition ratio of two types gutta-percha were statistically significant different ( 0.05). There were three phase transitions of the soft-type gutta-percha which started at 39.84 °C, 49.32 °C and 54.15 °C while the two phase transitions of the regular-type gutta-percha started at 40.48 °C and 53.45 °C. The glass transition temperature of the regular-type gutta-percha (44.24 °C) was higher than that of the soft-type gutta-percha (40.66 °C). Under various setting temperature, the higher compaction force in the regular-type gutta-percha was required ( 0.05).
The different components in gutta-percha contribute to its differences in thermal behavior. The soft-type had a higher proportion of gutta-percha and lower ZnO which makes the fluidity better than the regular-type.
背景/目的:在热牙胶技术中,软质型和常规型牙胶用于热塑性注射系统的回填。然而,关于这些回填牙胶性能的报道有限。本研究旨在分析和比较两种类型回填牙胶的成分、热行为和压实力。
研究了软质型和常规型回填牙胶(美国弗吉尼亚州费尔法克斯的B&L生物技术公司)。通过定量化学分析(n = 6)分离这些牙胶的无机和有机部分。使用能量色散光谱分析其成分。使用差示扫描量热法分析对温度变化的热行为。此外,使用压实模型研究压实力与温度之间的关系(n = 10)。
软质型牙胶含有更多的牙胶(3.69 - 5.85%)、碳比例(38.96 - 48.52%),以及更少的无机物(86.51 - 90.45%)、锌比例(29.36 - 35.67%)。两种类型牙胶的成分比例在统计学上有显著差异(P < 0.05)。软质型牙胶有三个相变,分别始于39.84℃、49.32℃和54.15℃,而常规型牙胶的两个相变始于40.48℃和53.45℃。常规型牙胶的玻璃化转变温度(44.24℃)高于软质型牙胶(40.66℃)。在各种设定温度下,常规型牙胶需要更高的压实力(P < 0.05)。
牙胶中的不同成分导致其热行为存在差异。软质型牙胶中牙胶比例更高,氧化锌含量更低,这使其流动性优于常规型牙胶。