• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

扫描电镜下比较 EndoActivator、PATS Vario 系统和 XP-endo Finisher 锉对玷污层去除效果的研究。

Effectiveness of EndoActivator, PATS Vario system, and XP-endo Finisher files on smear layer removal under scanning electron microscope: A comparative study.

机构信息

Department of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, ACPM Dental College, Dhule, Maharashtra, India.

出版信息

J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2024 Jul 1;42(3):195-202. doi: 10.4103/jisppd.jisppd_233_24. Epub 2024 Sep 9.

DOI:10.4103/jisppd.jisppd_233_24
PMID:39250203
Abstract

CONTEXT

The smear layer may harbor many bacteria; hence, alternative methods are used to disrupt and remove biofilm.

AIM

The aim of the study was to compare the effectiveness of EndoActivator, PATS Vario System, and XP-endo Finisher files on smear layer removal using a scanning electron microscope.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Sixty single-rooted extracted premolars with Vertucci Type 1 configuration were decoronated and divided into four groups. The groups were instrumented with the rotary ProTaper file system. All specimens were flushed with 1 ml of 3% sodium hypochlorite. Group 1 was irrigated with a conventional needle and syringe. In Group 2, the irrigant was activated with an EndoActivator. In Group 3, the irrigant was activated with PATS Vario system, and in Group 4, XP-endo Finisher files were used after biomechanical preparation to remove debris and smear layer. All specimens were finally rinsed with 3 ml of 3% sodium hypochlorite. The teeth underwent longitudinal splitting and grooving in the coronal, middle, and apical thirds, and then, the samples were taken for scanning electron microscopy to evaluate the amount of smear layer removal in each third.

RESULTS

The middle and coronal thirds Showed that almost similar efficacy to remove smear layer in both Group II and Group III. At the apical third, Group III showed comparatively better results than Group I, II, and IV, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Equal amount of smear layer was seen with EndoActivator and PATS Vario system when used as sonic irrigation devices.

摘要

背景

牙本质玷污层可能藏匿许多细菌,因此,人们使用替代方法来破坏和去除生物膜。

目的

本研究旨在通过扫描电子显微镜比较 EndoActivator、PATS Vario 系统和 XP-endo Finisher 锉对玷污层去除效果的影响。

受试者和方法

60 颗具有 1 型 Vertucci 构型的单根前磨牙被去冠并分为四组。使用 ProTaper 机用镍钛锉系统对每组牙齿进行根管预备。所有样本均用 1ml 的 3%次氯酸钠冲洗。第 1 组用常规的注射器和针头冲洗。第 2 组使用 EndoActivator 冲洗,第 3 组使用 PATS Vario 系统冲洗,第 4 组在根管机械预备后使用 XP-endo Finisher 锉以去除碎屑和玷污层。所有样本最后均用 3ml 的 3%次氯酸钠冲洗。牙齿在冠、中、根尖 1/3 处进行纵向劈开和开槽,然后采集样本进行扫描电子显微镜检查,以评估每个 1/3 区域的玷污层去除量。

结果

中 1/3 和冠 1/3 显示,第 2 组和第 3 组的牙本质玷污层去除效果几乎相似。根尖 1/3 处,第 3 组的效果分别优于第 1 组、第 2 组和第 4 组。

结论

当用作超声冲洗设备时,EndoActivator 和 PATS Vario 系统对牙本质玷污层的去除效果相当。

相似文献

1
Effectiveness of EndoActivator, PATS Vario system, and XP-endo Finisher files on smear layer removal under scanning electron microscope: A comparative study.扫描电镜下比较 EndoActivator、PATS Vario 系统和 XP-endo Finisher 锉对玷污层去除效果的研究。
J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2024 Jul 1;42(3):195-202. doi: 10.4103/jisppd.jisppd_233_24. Epub 2024 Sep 9.
2
Effectiveness of XP-endo Finisher, EndoActivator, and File agitation on debris and smear layer removal in curved root canals: a comparative study.XP-endo Finisher、EndoActivator和锉动法在弯曲根管中清除碎屑和玷污层的效果:一项对比研究。
Odontology. 2017 Apr;105(2):178-183. doi: 10.1007/s10266-016-0251-8. Epub 2016 May 20.
3
Comparative Evaluation of Smear Layer and Debris on the Canal Walls prepared with a Combination of Hand and Rotary ProTaper Technique using Scanning Electron Microscope.使用扫描电子显微镜对手动与旋转ProTaper技术联合制备的根管壁上的玷污层和碎屑进行比较评估。
J Contemp Dent Pract. 2016 Jul 1;17(7):574-81.
4
Efficacy of four different irrigation techniques combined with 60 °C 3% sodium hypochlorite and 17% EDTA in smear layer removal.四种不同冲洗技术联合 60°C 3%次氯酸钠和 17% EDTA 对清除玷污层效果的比较。
BMC Oral Health. 2014 Sep 8;14:114. doi: 10.1186/1472-6831-14-114.
5
Evaluation of debris and smear layer removal with XP-endo finisher: A scanning electron microscopic study.使用XP-endo修整器评估碎屑和玷污层的去除:一项扫描电子显微镜研究。
Indian J Dent Res. 2019 May-Jun;30(3):420-423. doi: 10.4103/ijdr.IJDR_655_17.
6
[In vitro evaluation of the effectiveness of XP-endo Finisher file on smear layer removal after root canal instrumentation].[XP-endo Finisher锉在根管预备后对玷污层去除效果的体外评价]
Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2019 Feb 1;37(1):48-52. doi: 10.7518/hxkq.2019.01.009.
7
Comparison of the efficacy of Smear Clear with and without a canal brush in smear layer and debris removal from instrumented root canal using WaveOne versus ProTaper: a scanning electron microscopic study.使用WaveOne与ProTaper比较带与不带根管刷的Smear Clear在去除预备根管的玷污层和碎屑方面的效果:一项扫描电子显微镜研究
J Endod. 2014 Mar;40(3):446-50. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2013.09.028. Epub 2013 Nov 1.
8
Comparison of irrigant activation devices and conventional needle irrigation on smear layer and debris removal in curved canals. (Smear layer removal from irrigant activation using SEM).不同冲洗激活装置与传统注射器冲洗在弯曲根管内对玷污层和碎屑清除效果的比较。(使用扫描电镜观察冲洗激活对玷污层的去除效果)
Aust Endod J. 2021 Aug;47(2):143-149. doi: 10.1111/aej.12482. Epub 2021 Mar 8.
9
A comparative evaluation of cleaning efficacy (debris and smear layer removal) of hand and two NiTi rotary instrumentation systems (K3 and ProTaper): a SEM study.手部操作与两种镍钛旋转器械系统(K3和ProTaper)清洁效果(去除碎屑和玷污层)的比较评估:一项扫描电子显微镜研究
J Contemp Dent Pract. 2013 Nov 1;14(6):1028-35. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1445.
10
Debris and Smear Layer Removal from Oval Root Canals Comparing XP-Endo Finisher, EndoActivator, and Manual Irrigation: A SEM Evaluation.比较XP根管锉、根管激活器和手动冲洗对椭圆形根管内碎屑和玷污层的去除效果:扫描电子显微镜评估
Eur J Dent. 2020 Oct;14(4):626-633. doi: 10.1055/s-0040-1714762. Epub 2020 Aug 10.