封口机超声活化后填充物去除补充方案的有效性-实验室调查。

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Brazilian oral research Pub Date : 2025-04-04 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1590/1807-3107bor-2025.vol39.034
Amanda Freitas da Rosa, Dayana Mara Silva Chaves, Luiz Carlos de Lima Dias-Junior, Gabriela Pasqualin Ghidini, Julia Menezes Savaris, Rayssa Sabino da Silva, Roberta Pinto Pereira, Eduardo Antunes Bortoluzzi, Cleonice da Silveira Teixeira, Lucas da Fonseca Roberti Garcia
{"title":"封口机超声活化后填充物去除补充方案的有效性-实验室调查。","authors":"Amanda Freitas da Rosa, Dayana Mara Silva Chaves, Luiz Carlos de Lima Dias-Junior, Gabriela Pasqualin Ghidini, Julia Menezes Savaris, Rayssa Sabino da Silva, Roberta Pinto Pereira, Eduardo Antunes Bortoluzzi, Cleonice da Silveira Teixeira, Lucas da Fonseca Roberti Garcia","doi":"10.1590/1807-3107bor-2025.vol39.034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Ultrasonic activation of the endodontic sealer makes it difficult to remove the material during endodontic reintervention. Therefore, supplementary removal protocols should be tested to optimize the removal of the remaining filling material. This study assessed the effectiveness of supplementary protocols for filling material removal after sealer ultrasonic activation (UA). Sixty teeth were prepared and distributed into two groups: UA and No UA of the sealer before obturation. Teeth were re-instrumented and two supplementary removal protocols were tested, resulting in six groups (n = 10): NoUA; NoUA+XP (XP-endo Finisher); NoUA+CS (Clearsonic-R1); UA; UA+XP; and UA+CS. Root canals were analyzed under stereomicroscopy and scanning electron microscopy for quantification of the remaining filling material. Considering the total root canal area, the NoUA+CS group had the lowest remaining filling material compared to NoUA+XP, UA+XP and UA+CS groups (p < 0.05). When the root thirds were compared, there was no statistical difference among groups (p > 0.05). The XP-endo Finisher instrument demonstrated the lowest effectiveness when used as a supplementary step. In contrast, the Clearsonic-R1 insert exhibited the highest performance.</p>","PeriodicalId":9240,"journal":{"name":"Brazilian oral research","volume":"39 ","pages":"e034"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11970515/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effectiveness of supplementary protocols for filling material removal after sealer ultrasonic activation - a laboratory investigation.\",\"authors\":\"Amanda Freitas da Rosa, Dayana Mara Silva Chaves, Luiz Carlos de Lima Dias-Junior, Gabriela Pasqualin Ghidini, Julia Menezes Savaris, Rayssa Sabino da Silva, Roberta Pinto Pereira, Eduardo Antunes Bortoluzzi, Cleonice da Silveira Teixeira, Lucas da Fonseca Roberti Garcia\",\"doi\":\"10.1590/1807-3107bor-2025.vol39.034\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Ultrasonic activation of the endodontic sealer makes it difficult to remove the material during endodontic reintervention. Therefore, supplementary removal protocols should be tested to optimize the removal of the remaining filling material. This study assessed the effectiveness of supplementary protocols for filling material removal after sealer ultrasonic activation (UA). Sixty teeth were prepared and distributed into two groups: UA and No UA of the sealer before obturation. Teeth were re-instrumented and two supplementary removal protocols were tested, resulting in six groups (n = 10): NoUA; NoUA+XP (XP-endo Finisher); NoUA+CS (Clearsonic-R1); UA; UA+XP; and UA+CS. Root canals were analyzed under stereomicroscopy and scanning electron microscopy for quantification of the remaining filling material. Considering the total root canal area, the NoUA+CS group had the lowest remaining filling material compared to NoUA+XP, UA+XP and UA+CS groups (p < 0.05). When the root thirds were compared, there was no statistical difference among groups (p > 0.05). The XP-endo Finisher instrument demonstrated the lowest effectiveness when used as a supplementary step. In contrast, the Clearsonic-R1 insert exhibited the highest performance.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9240,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Brazilian oral research\",\"volume\":\"39 \",\"pages\":\"e034\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11970515/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Brazilian oral research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-3107bor-2025.vol39.034\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brazilian oral research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-3107bor-2025.vol39.034","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

超声激活的根管密封器使得在根管再干预过程中难以去除材料。因此,应该测试补充去除方案,以优化剩余填充材料的去除。本研究评估了超声激活(UA)后填充材料去除的补充方案的有效性。准备60颗牙,将其分为两组:封闭前的UA组和未UA组。重新安置牙齿,并测试两种辅助拔除方案,共6组(n = 10): NoUA;NoUA+XP (XP-endo Finisher);NoUA + CS (Clearsonic-R1);UA;UA + XP;和UA + CS。在体视显微镜和扫描电镜下对根管进行分析,以定量剩余的充填物质。从根管总面积来看,NoUA+CS组的剩余充填材料较NoUA+XP、UA+XP和UA+CS组最低(p < 0.05)。根三分之一比较,各组间差异无统计学意义(p < 0.05)。XP-endo Finisher仪器作为辅助步骤时的有效性最低。相比之下,Clearsonic-R1插片表现出最高的性能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effectiveness of supplementary protocols for filling material removal after sealer ultrasonic activation - a laboratory investigation.

Ultrasonic activation of the endodontic sealer makes it difficult to remove the material during endodontic reintervention. Therefore, supplementary removal protocols should be tested to optimize the removal of the remaining filling material. This study assessed the effectiveness of supplementary protocols for filling material removal after sealer ultrasonic activation (UA). Sixty teeth were prepared and distributed into two groups: UA and No UA of the sealer before obturation. Teeth were re-instrumented and two supplementary removal protocols were tested, resulting in six groups (n = 10): NoUA; NoUA+XP (XP-endo Finisher); NoUA+CS (Clearsonic-R1); UA; UA+XP; and UA+CS. Root canals were analyzed under stereomicroscopy and scanning electron microscopy for quantification of the remaining filling material. Considering the total root canal area, the NoUA+CS group had the lowest remaining filling material compared to NoUA+XP, UA+XP and UA+CS groups (p < 0.05). When the root thirds were compared, there was no statistical difference among groups (p > 0.05). The XP-endo Finisher instrument demonstrated the lowest effectiveness when used as a supplementary step. In contrast, the Clearsonic-R1 insert exhibited the highest performance.

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
3.70
自引率
4.00%
发文量
107
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