Sairaman Sruthi, Solete Pradeep, Jeevanandan Ganesh, Antony S Delphine Priscilla, Kavoor Sowmya, Adimulapu Hima Sandeep
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Saveetha Dental College, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
Department of Pediatric and Preventive Dentistry, Saveetha Dental College, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
J Conserv Dent Endod. 2024 Jan;27(1):82-86. doi: 10.4103/JCDE.JCDE_224_23. Epub 2024 Jan 13.
The aim of nonsurgical retreatment is to remove the previous filling material followed by chemo-mechanical preparation of the canal to achieve proper disinfection of the root canal system. This is then followed by re-obturation. This study evaluates the time taken to retrieve the gutta-percha and the quantity of remaining filling material after retreatment with two different file systems. The quantity of remaining filling material was assessed using nano-computed tomography (CT) due to its increased accuracy.
Forty extracted single-rooted teeth were split into two groups at random and decoronated and obturated at a standard root length of 16 mm. Solite RS3 (SRS-3) Retreatment and ProTaper Universal Retreatment (PTUR) systems were used to retrieve the gutta-percha after a preoperative nano-CT scan. Postoperative nano-CT scan was taken and both the scans were superimposed to quantify the remaining filling material. The time taken to remove gutta-percha was measured using a stopwatch. The statistical analysis comparing the two groups was conducted using the independent t-test.
The quantitative analysis of remaining filling material using nano-CT showed no statistical difference between both the file systems used ( > 0.05). However, SRS-3 took significantly less time in the removal of gutta-percha ( < 0.05).
Hence, we can conclude that there is no significant difference in the amount of remaining filling material between both the file systems. However, time taken to remove the gutta-percha was lesser in SRS-3 compared to PTUR file system.
非手术再治疗的目的是去除先前的充填材料,随后对根管进行化学机械预备,以实现根管系统的适当消毒。然后进行再次充填。本研究评估了使用两种不同锉系统进行再治疗后取出牙胶的时间以及剩余充填材料的量。由于其更高的准确性,使用纳米计算机断层扫描(CT)评估剩余充填材料的量。
将40颗拔除的单根牙随机分为两组,截冠并充填至标准根长16mm。术前进行纳米CT扫描后,使用Solite RS3(SRS-3)再治疗系统和ProTaper Universal再治疗(PTUR)系统取出牙胶。术后进行纳米CT扫描,并将两次扫描图像叠加以量化剩余充填材料。使用秒表测量取出牙胶所需的时间。采用独立t检验对两组进行统计学分析。
使用纳米CT对剩余充填材料进行定量分析,结果显示所使用的两种锉系统之间无统计学差异(>0.05)。然而,SRS-3取出牙胶的时间明显更短(<0.05)。
因此,我们可以得出结论,两种锉系统在剩余充填材料量方面无显著差异。然而,与PTUR锉系统相比,SRS-3取出牙胶的时间更短。