在模拟s形根管中,有无滑动路径时,Reciproc Blue和One Curve塑形能力的比较。

Vincenzo Biasillo, Raffaella Castagnola, Mauro Colangeli, Claudia Panzetta, Irene Minciacchi, Gianluca Plotino, Simone Staffoli, Luca Marigo, Nicola Maria Grande
{"title":"在模拟s形根管中,有无滑动路径时,Reciproc Blue和One Curve塑形能力的比较。","authors":"Vincenzo Biasillo,&nbsp;Raffaella Castagnola,&nbsp;Mauro Colangeli,&nbsp;Claudia Panzetta,&nbsp;Irene Minciacchi,&nbsp;Gianluca Plotino,&nbsp;Simone Staffoli,&nbsp;Luca Marigo,&nbsp;Nicola Maria Grande","doi":"10.5395/rde.2022.47.e3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aimed to assess the impact of a glide-path on the shaping ability of 2 single-file instruments and to compare the centering ability, maintenance of original canal curvatures and area of instrumentation in simulated S-shaped root canals.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Forty simulated S-shaped root canals were used and were prepared with One Curve (group OC), One G and OC (group GOC), Reciproc Blue (group RB) and R-Pilot and RB (group PRB) and scanned before and after instrumentation. The images were analyzed using AutoCAD. After superimposing the samples, 4 levels (D1, D2, D3, and D4) and 2 angles (Δ1 and Δ2) were established to evaluate the centering ability and modification of the canal curvatures. Then, the area of instrumentation (ΔA) was measured. The data were analyzed using 2-way analysis of variance and Tukey's test for multiple comparisons (<i>p</i> < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Regarding the centering ability in the apical part (D3, D4), the use of the glide-path yielded better results than the single-file groups. Among the groups at D4, OC showed the worst results (<i>p</i> < 0.05). The OC system removed less material (ΔA) than the RB system, and for Δ1, OC yielded a worse result than RB (<i>p</i> < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The glide-path improved the centering ability in the apical part of the simulated S-shaped canals. The RB system showed a better centering ability in the apical part and major respect of the canal curvatures compared with OC system.</p>","PeriodicalId":21102,"journal":{"name":"Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/dc/49/rde-47-e3.PMC8891470.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of shaping ability of the Reciproc Blue and One Curve with or without glide path in simulated S-shaped root canals.\",\"authors\":\"Vincenzo Biasillo,&nbsp;Raffaella Castagnola,&nbsp;Mauro Colangeli,&nbsp;Claudia Panzetta,&nbsp;Irene Minciacchi,&nbsp;Gianluca Plotino,&nbsp;Simone Staffoli,&nbsp;Luca Marigo,&nbsp;Nicola Maria Grande\",\"doi\":\"10.5395/rde.2022.47.e3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aimed to assess the impact of a glide-path on the shaping ability of 2 single-file instruments and to compare the centering ability, maintenance of original canal curvatures and area of instrumentation in simulated S-shaped root canals.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Forty simulated S-shaped root canals were used and were prepared with One Curve (group OC), One G and OC (group GOC), Reciproc Blue (group RB) and R-Pilot and RB (group PRB) and scanned before and after instrumentation. The images were analyzed using AutoCAD. After superimposing the samples, 4 levels (D1, D2, D3, and D4) and 2 angles (Δ1 and Δ2) were established to evaluate the centering ability and modification of the canal curvatures. Then, the area of instrumentation (ΔA) was measured. The data were analyzed using 2-way analysis of variance and Tukey's test for multiple comparisons (<i>p</i> < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Regarding the centering ability in the apical part (D3, D4), the use of the glide-path yielded better results than the single-file groups. Among the groups at D4, OC showed the worst results (<i>p</i> < 0.05). The OC system removed less material (ΔA) than the RB system, and for Δ1, OC yielded a worse result than RB (<i>p</i> < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The glide-path improved the centering ability in the apical part of the simulated S-shaped canals. The RB system showed a better centering ability in the apical part and major respect of the canal curvatures compared with OC system.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21102,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/dc/49/rde-47-e3.PMC8891470.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2022.47.e3\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2022.47.e3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究旨在评估滑动路径对两种单排根管成形能力的影响,并比较模拟s形根管的对中能力、对原始根管曲率的维持和根管面积的影响。材料和方法:使用One Curve (OC组)、One G and OC (GOC组)、Reciproc Blue (RB组)和R-Pilot and RB (PRB组)制备的模拟s形根管40根,在预备前后进行扫描。使用AutoCAD对图像进行分析。将样本叠加后,建立4个水平(D1、D2、D3和D4)和2个角度(Δ1和Δ2)来评价根管曲率的定心能力和修改。然后测量仪器面积(ΔA)。资料分析采用双向方差分析和多组比较的Tukey检验(p < 0.05)。结果:对于根尖部分(D3, D4)的定心能力,滑动路径组的效果优于单锉组。在D4组中,OC组表现最差(p < 0.05)。OC系统比RB系统去除的材料少(ΔA),对于Δ1, OC的效果比RB差(p < 0.05)。结论:滑动路径提高了模拟s形根管根尖部分的对中能力。在根尖部分和根管曲率的主要方面,RB系统比OC系统具有更好的对中能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Comparison of shaping ability of the Reciproc Blue and One Curve with or without glide path in simulated S-shaped root canals.

Comparison of shaping ability of the Reciproc Blue and One Curve with or without glide path in simulated S-shaped root canals.

Comparison of shaping ability of the Reciproc Blue and One Curve with or without glide path in simulated S-shaped root canals.

Comparison of shaping ability of the Reciproc Blue and One Curve with or without glide path in simulated S-shaped root canals.

Objectives: This study aimed to assess the impact of a glide-path on the shaping ability of 2 single-file instruments and to compare the centering ability, maintenance of original canal curvatures and area of instrumentation in simulated S-shaped root canals.

Materials and methods: Forty simulated S-shaped root canals were used and were prepared with One Curve (group OC), One G and OC (group GOC), Reciproc Blue (group RB) and R-Pilot and RB (group PRB) and scanned before and after instrumentation. The images were analyzed using AutoCAD. After superimposing the samples, 4 levels (D1, D2, D3, and D4) and 2 angles (Δ1 and Δ2) were established to evaluate the centering ability and modification of the canal curvatures. Then, the area of instrumentation (ΔA) was measured. The data were analyzed using 2-way analysis of variance and Tukey's test for multiple comparisons (p < 0.05).

Results: Regarding the centering ability in the apical part (D3, D4), the use of the glide-path yielded better results than the single-file groups. Among the groups at D4, OC showed the worst results (p < 0.05). The OC system removed less material (ΔA) than the RB system, and for Δ1, OC yielded a worse result than RB (p < 0.05).

Conclusions: The glide-path improved the centering ability in the apical part of the simulated S-shaped canals. The RB system showed a better centering ability in the apical part and major respect of the canal curvatures compared with OC system.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
35
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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