Efficiency of Different Retrieval Techniques in Gutta-Percha Removal in Endodontic Retreatment: An In Vitro Study

IF 0.8 Q3 Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
U. L. Neelima, Nuha S. Alghamdi, Abdulrahman Yahya Alshahrani, Mangesh Shenoy Panakaje, Laxmikant Late, Alen Pius, D. N. Gavarraju
{"title":"Efficiency of Different Retrieval Techniques in Gutta-Percha Removal in Endodontic Retreatment: An In Vitro Study","authors":"U. L. Neelima, Nuha S. Alghamdi, Abdulrahman Yahya Alshahrani, Mangesh Shenoy Panakaje, Laxmikant Late, Alen Pius, D. N. Gavarraju","doi":"10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_396_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT\n \n \n \n The purpose of this in vitro investigation was to assess the effectiveness of various gutta-percha retrieval methods in endodontic retreatment.\n \n \n \n Five groups were randomly allocated to extract human teeth that had already had root canal therapy: manual files, rotary tools, heat, solvents, and ultrasonics. By evaluating the amount of filling material still present, gutta-percha clearance was quantitatively examined, and root canal cleanliness was qualitatively appraised. To compare the effectiveness of retrieval approaches, statistical analysis was done.\n \n \n \n Hand files, heat, and solvents were less effective than rotary devices and ultrasonics at removing gutta-percha (P < 0.05). A quantitative investigation showed that the groups using rotary instruments (0.87 mm) and ultrasonics (0.68 mm) had much less gutta-percha left. The qualitative evaluation revealed that rotary instruments (2.12) and ultrasonics (2.45) had greater cleaning ratings compared to other methods.\n \n \n \n In conclusion, gutta-percha can be effectively removed during endodontic retreatment by using rotary tools and ultrasonics, which provide both quantitative efficiency and qualitative purity. The implementation of sophisticated retrieval procedures to maximize treatment results in clinical practice is supported by these findings.\n","PeriodicalId":16824,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_396_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT The purpose of this in vitro investigation was to assess the effectiveness of various gutta-percha retrieval methods in endodontic retreatment. Five groups were randomly allocated to extract human teeth that had already had root canal therapy: manual files, rotary tools, heat, solvents, and ultrasonics. By evaluating the amount of filling material still present, gutta-percha clearance was quantitatively examined, and root canal cleanliness was qualitatively appraised. To compare the effectiveness of retrieval approaches, statistical analysis was done. Hand files, heat, and solvents were less effective than rotary devices and ultrasonics at removing gutta-percha (P < 0.05). A quantitative investigation showed that the groups using rotary instruments (0.87 mm) and ultrasonics (0.68 mm) had much less gutta-percha left. The qualitative evaluation revealed that rotary instruments (2.12) and ultrasonics (2.45) had greater cleaning ratings compared to other methods. In conclusion, gutta-percha can be effectively removed during endodontic retreatment by using rotary tools and ultrasonics, which provide both quantitative efficiency and qualitative purity. The implementation of sophisticated retrieval procedures to maximize treatment results in clinical practice is supported by these findings.
牙髓再治疗中不同取材技术在去除 Gutta-Percha 中的效率:体外研究
摘要 这项体外调查的目的是评估各种牙胶回收方法在牙髓再治疗中的有效性。 研究人员随机分配了五组人,分别用手动锉、旋转工具、加热、溶剂和超声波来拔除已经接受过根管治疗的牙齿。通过评估仍然存在的填充材料的数量,对水门汀胶清除情况进行定量检查,并对根管清洁度进行定性评估。为了比较取材方法的有效性,我们进行了统计分析。 手工锉、加热和溶剂清除水门汀的效果均低于旋转装置和超声波(P < 0.05)。定量调查显示,使用旋转器械(0.87 毫米)和超声波器械(0.68 毫米)的组别所残留的古塔漆更少。定性评估显示,与其他方法相比,旋转器械(2.12)和超声波(2.45)的清洁度更高。 总之,在牙髓再治疗过程中,使用旋转工具和超声波可以有效地去除古塔漆,这两种方法在数量上有效,在质量上纯净。这些研究结果支持在临床实践中实施复杂的回收程序,以最大限度地提高治疗效果。
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
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
275
审稿时长
34 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Pharmacy And Bioallied Sciences is a Quarterly multidisciplinary open access biomedical journal. Journal of Pharmacy And Bioallied Sciences is an international medium of interaction between scientist, academicians and industrial personnel’s.JPBS is now offial publication of OPUBS.
×
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