Pereira Thiago Machado, Piva Evandro, de Oliveira da Rosa Wellington Luiz, da Silva Nobreza Antônio Marcos, Pivatto Kellin, Aranha Andreza Maria Fábio, Pécora Jesus Djalma, Borges Álvaro Henrique
Department of Oral Sciences, University of Cuiabá, Cuiabá, MT, Brazil.
Department of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Federal University of Pelotas, Pelotas, RS, Brazil.
Iran Endod J. 2021 Summer;16(3):139-149. doi: 10.22037/iej.v16i3.26787.
A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to evaluate the physicomechanical properties of tertiary monoblock obturation with different obturation techniques.
PubMed (MEDLINE), Web of Science, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, LILACS, IBECS, and BBO were searched time. PICO question was: "In extracted human teeth (Population), does tertiary monoblock obturation (Intervention) have superior physicomechanical properties (Outcome) compared to conventional obturation systems (Comparison)?". Statistical analyses for push-out bond strength were performed with RevMan software by comparing the mean differences of each study, with a 95% confidence interval. Inverse variance was used as statistical method, random-effects models as analysis model, and heterogeneity between studies was assessed by Cochran's Q test and I statistic ( <0.05).
Of 2162 studies retrieved, 31 were included in this review for "Study Characteristics". Ten studies were included in the meta-analysis. Analysis demonstrated that conventional obturation had significantly higher push-out bond strength than tertiary monoblock obturation ( <0 .01), with a mean difference of -1.00 (95% CI, -1.41 to -0.58; I=100%). Subgroups using single-cone and cold lateral condensation techniques showed significantly lower push-out bond strength for tertiary monoblock obturation ( <0.01), respectively with a mean difference of -0.09 (95% CI, -1.13 to -0.67; I=97%) and of -1.97 (95% CI, -3.19 to -0.75; I=100%). The warm vertical compaction subgroup showed no statistically significant difference between tertiary monoblock and conventional systems ( =0.13), with a mean difference of 0.49 (95% CI, -0.14 to 1.12; I=10%).
Tertiary monoblock systems have a push-out bond strength similar to conventional systems when used with warm vertical compaction.
进行了一项系统评价和荟萃分析，以评估不同充填技术的三级整体式充填的物理力学性能。
对PubMed（MEDLINE）、科学网、Scopus、Cochrane图书馆、LILACS、IBECS和BBO进行了检索。PICO问题为：“在拔除的人类牙齿中（研究对象），与传统充填系统相比（对照），三级整体式充填（干预）是否具有更好的物理力学性能（结局）？”。使用RevMan软件通过比较每项研究的平均差异进行推出粘结强度的统计分析，置信区间为95%。采用逆方差作为统计方法，随机效应模型作为分析模型，并通过Cochran's Q检验和I统计量评估研究间的异质性（<0.05）。
在检索到的2162项研究中，有31项纳入了本综述的“研究特征”。10项研究纳入了荟萃分析。分析表明，传统充填的推出粘结强度显著高于三级整体式充填（<0.01），平均差异为-1.00（95%CI，-1.41至-0.58；I=100%）。使用单锥和冷侧方加压技术的亚组显示，三级整体式充填的推出粘结强度显著较低（<0.01），平均差异分别为-0.09（95%CI，-1.13至-0.67；I=97%）和-1.97（95%CI，-3.19至-0.75；I=100%）。热垂直加压亚组显示，三级整体式充填和传统系统之间无统计学显著差异（=0.13），平均差异为0.49（95%CI，-0.14至1.12；I=10%）。
当与热垂直加压一起使用时，三级整体式系统的推出粘结强度与传统系统相似。
Zotero 插件
