Retreatability of NeoSEALER Flo obturated with warm vertical compaction versus single-cone technique using two different retreatment systems

Toka Kamaleldeen Elzanaty, M. Elashiry, A. Mahran
{"title":"Retreatability of NeoSEALER Flo obturated with warm vertical compaction versus single-cone technique using two different retreatment systems","authors":"Toka Kamaleldeen Elzanaty, M. Elashiry, A. Mahran","doi":"10.4103/jcde.jcde_314_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n \n The aim of this study was to compare the retreatability of NeoSEALER Flo obturated with warm vertical compaction (WVC) and single-cone (SC) techniques using two different retreatment systems.\n \n \n \n Thirty-two root canals were shaped and obturated with NeoSEALER Flo either in an SC obturation technique or a WVC technique. Samples were retreated using ProTaper retreatment or EdgeFile XR retreatment system. The percentage of remaining debris after retreatment was analyzed under a scanning electron microscope using ImageJ software. The time taken to reach full working length (WL) and induce patency was recorded.\n \n \n \n Statistical analysis was performed using an unpaired t-test and a one-way analysis of variance test.\n \n \n \n The percentage of remaining debris after retreatment was significantly higher in the SC technique than in the WVC technique, regardless of the retreatment system used. EdgeFile XR system removed more filling material than the ProTaper retreatment system, regardless of the obturation technique. The apical region showed significantly higher remaining debris than other regions in all groups. The WL and patency were achieved faster in the SC group, while in the WVC group, the EdgeFile XR system was faster.\n \n \n \n The WVC technique showed better retrieval of the filling material; however, a longer time was taken for retreatment. EdgeFile XR system performed better in removing filling materials from inside the canals.\n","PeriodicalId":516572,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics","volume":"53 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jcde.jcde_314_23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare the retreatability of NeoSEALER Flo obturated with warm vertical compaction (WVC) and single-cone (SC) techniques using two different retreatment systems. Thirty-two root canals were shaped and obturated with NeoSEALER Flo either in an SC obturation technique or a WVC technique. Samples were retreated using ProTaper retreatment or EdgeFile XR retreatment system. The percentage of remaining debris after retreatment was analyzed under a scanning electron microscope using ImageJ software. The time taken to reach full working length (WL) and induce patency was recorded. Statistical analysis was performed using an unpaired t-test and a one-way analysis of variance test. The percentage of remaining debris after retreatment was significantly higher in the SC technique than in the WVC technique, regardless of the retreatment system used. EdgeFile XR system removed more filling material than the ProTaper retreatment system, regardless of the obturation technique. The apical region showed significantly higher remaining debris than other regions in all groups. The WL and patency were achieved faster in the SC group, while in the WVC group, the EdgeFile XR system was faster. The WVC technique showed better retrieval of the filling material; however, a longer time was taken for retreatment. EdgeFile XR system performed better in removing filling materials from inside the canals.
使用两种不同的再处理系统,用温热垂直压实法与单锥技术钝化 NeoSEALER Flo 的可再处理性比较
本研究的目的是通过两种不同的再治疗系统,比较用温热垂直压实(WVC)和单锥体(SC)技术封固的 NeoSEALER Flo 的可再治疗性。 研究人员用 NeoSEALER Flo 对 32 个根管进行了塑形,并用 SC 封闭技术或 WVC 技术进行了封闭。使用 ProTaper 再治疗系统或 EdgeFile XR 再治疗系统对样本进行再治疗。使用 ImageJ 软件在扫描电子显微镜下分析再处理后残留碎屑的百分比。记录达到完全工作长度(WL)和诱导通畅所需的时间。 统计分析采用非配对 t 检验和单因素方差分析。 无论使用哪种再治疗系统,SC 技术再治疗后残留碎片的百分比都明显高于 WVC 技术。EdgeFile XR系统比ProTaper再治疗系统去除更多的充填材料,无论采用哪种封固技术。在所有组别中,根尖区的残余碎屑明显高于其他区域。在 SC 组中,实现 WL 和通畅的速度更快,而在 WVC 组中,EdgeFile XR 系统的速度更快。 WVC 技术显示出更好的填充材料回收率,但再治疗所需的时间更长。EdgeFile XR系统在从根管内部取出充填材料方面表现更好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信