Gençoğlu N, Günday M, Baş M, Başaran B
Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Marmara University, Istanbul, Türkiye.
J Marmara Univ Dent Fac. 1994 Sep;2(1):441-6.
Two thermoplasticized gutta-percha techniques were evaluated for the percentage area of canal obturated by gutta-percha and compared with the lateral condensation of gutta-percha technique. All obturation systems were used in conjunction with Grossman's sealer. Single rooted teeth were obturated by either injected thermoplasticized gutta-percha (Ultrafil), thermoplasticized gutta-percha with metal carrier (Thermafil) or lateral condensation of gutta-percha. There were ten specimens in each group. The teeth were embedded in resin, sectioned at 1.5 mm, 3 mm and 4.5 mm from the root apex and examined with a stereomicroscope. Specimens filled by Ultrafil and Thermafil contained a significantly higher percentage of gutta-percha than specimens filled by the lateral condensation technique at every level. However no difference was found between Ultrafil and Thermafil. Three lateral condensation specimens showed voids at the 1.5 mm section; no voids were detected in specimens filled by Ultrafil or Thermafil at any level.
对两种热塑牙胶技术进行了评估,以确定牙胶封闭根管的面积百分比,并与牙胶侧方加压技术进行比较。所有封闭系统均与格罗斯曼封闭剂联合使用。单根牙采用注射式热塑牙胶(Ultrafil)、带金属载体的热塑牙胶(Thermafil)或牙胶侧方加压法进行封闭。每组有10个标本。将牙齿包埋在树脂中,从根尖起分别在1.5毫米、3毫米和4.5毫米处切片,并用体视显微镜检查。在每个层面上,由Ultrafil和Thermafil充填的标本所含牙胶的百分比明显高于采用侧方加压技术充填的标本。然而,Ultrafil和Thermafil之间未发现差异。三个侧方加压标本在1.5毫米切片处显示有空隙;在Ultrafil或Thermafil充填的标本中,任何层面均未检测到空隙。