Suppr超能文献

通过微型计算机断层扫描成像评估3种多频电子根尖定位仪的临床准确性和精确性。

Clinical Accuracy and Precision of 3 Multifrequency Electronic Apex Locators Assessed through Micro-Computed Tomographic Imaging.

作者信息

De-Deus Gustavo, Cozer Viviany, Souza Erick Miranda, Silva Emmanuel João Nogueira Leal, Belladonna Felipe Gonçalves, Simões-Carvalho Marco, Versiani Marco Aurélio

机构信息

Department of Endodontics, Fluminense Federal University, Niterói, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

Department of Dentistry II, Federal University of Maranhão, São Luís, Maranhão, Brazil.

出版信息

J Endod. 2023 May;49(5):487-495. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2023.02.011. Epub 2023 Feb 26.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to compare the in vivo accuracy and precision of 3 electronic apex locators (EALs) in determining the position of the major foramen using micro-computed tomographic (micro-CT) technology.

METHODS

After access preparation of 23 necrotic or vital teeth from 5 patients, canals were negotiated, and hand files were used to determine the position of the foramen with 3 EALs: Propex Pixi (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland), Woodpex III (Woodpecker Medical Instrument Co, Guilin, China), and Root ZX II (J Morita, Tokyo, Japan). After fixing the silicon stop to the file, teeth were extracted and scanned in a micro-CT device with and without the instrument inserted into the canal. Data sets were coregistered, and the accuracy and precision of the EALs were determined at a tolerance level of ±0.5 mm by measuring the distance from the tip of the instruments to a tangential line crossing the margins of the foramen. Statistical comparisons were performed using Friedman with post hoc related samples sign and Spearman tests (α = 5%).

RESULTS

A significant difference was detected comparing the accuracy of Root ZX II (100%), Woodpex III (86.96%), and Propex Pixi (52.17%) (P < .05). There was a lack of significance in the relationship between the pulp status and the accuracy of the tested EALs (P > .05). Propex Pixi was significantly less precise than Root ZX II (P < .05), whereas no difference was found between Woodpex III and Root ZX II or Propex Pixi (P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

EALs presented similar precision, but Woodpex III and Root ZX II showed better accuracy to determine the position of the apical major foramen than Propex Pixi.

摘要

引言

本研究旨在使用微型计算机断层扫描(micro-CT)技术比较3种电子根尖定位仪(EAL)在确定主要根尖孔位置时的体内准确性和精确性。

方法

在对5名患者的23颗坏死或活髓牙进行开髓预备后,疏通根管,使用手用锉配合3种EAL确定根尖孔位置,这3种EAL分别为:Propex Pixi(登士柏迈尔牙科,瑞士巴拉格)、啄木鸟III型(桂林啄木鸟医疗器械有限公司,中国桂林)和Root ZX II(日本森田株式会社,东京)。将硅橡胶止动片固定在锉上后,拔除牙齿,在微型计算机断层扫描仪中分别在根管内插入和未插入器械的情况下进行扫描。对数据集进行配准,通过测量器械尖端到穿过根尖孔边缘的切线的距离,在±0.5毫米的公差水平下确定EAL的准确性和精确性。使用Friedman检验以及事后相关样本符号检验和Spearman检验进行统计学比较(α = 5%)。

结果

比较Root ZX II(100%)、啄木鸟III型(86.96%)和Propex Pixi(52.17%)的准确性时发现存在显著差异(P <.05)。牙髓状态与受试EAL的准确性之间的关系无统计学意义(P >.05)。Propex Pixi的精确性明显低于Root ZX II(P <.05),而啄木鸟III型与Root ZX II或Propex Pixi之间未发现差异(P >.05)。

结论

EAL的精确性相似,但在确定根尖主要根尖孔位置方面,啄木鸟III型和Root ZX II比Propex Pixi具有更高的准确性。

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