三种不同乳牙封闭技术的体积比较评价:一项体外研究。

Q3 Dentistry
Aswathy Subramanian, V P Kannan, Madhu Santhakumar
{"title":"三种不同乳牙封闭技术的体积比较评价:一项体外研究。","authors":"Aswathy Subramanian, V P Kannan, Madhu Santhakumar","doi":"10.5005/jp-journals-10005-3229","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The success of endodontic treatment in a primary teeth depends on good biomechanical preparation as well as the quality of obturation. In order to ensure this success, the properties of obturating material as well as the technique of insertion is crucial.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the quality of obturation with Pastinject and NaviTip to that of an endodontic plugger, using zinc oxide eugenol (ZOE) in extracted primary mandibular molars, with the assistance of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A total of 99 primary mandibular second molar root canals were selected, and 33 canals were randomly allocated in each obturating group by block randomization method: group I-endodontic pluggers; group II-NaviTip; and group III-Pastinject. The total volume of root canal before obturation (X) was measured in mm<sup>3</sup>. A homogeneous mixture of slow-setting ZOE was delivered using each technique. Following obturation, a second CBCT scan was done under the same parameters to determine the volume of the obturating material within the canal (Y mm<sup>3</sup>). The percentage of obturated volume (POV) within each canal and the volume of voids among the three groups were compared using Kruskal-Wallis test. Fisher's exact test was used to compare the number of optimally filled, overfilled, and underfilled canals among different groups.</p><p><strong>Results and discussion: </strong>The results of the present study showed significant difference between the three groups in terms of POV (<i>p</i> = 0.001) and volume of voids (<i>p</i> = 0.001), whereas no significant difference was found in terms of total number of voids (<i>p</i> = 0.491) and extent of fill (<i>p</i> = 0.152).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>It was concluded that Pastinject provided the best result with the highest POV and lowest volume of voids. Pastinject also had the least number of voids and maximum number of optimally filled canals.</p><p><strong>How to cite this article: </strong>Subramanian A, Kannan VP, Santhakumar M. A Comparative Volumetric Evaluation of Three Different Obturation Techniques in Primary Teeth: An <i>In Vitro</i> Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2025;18(7):856-863.</p>","PeriodicalId":36045,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry","volume":"18 7","pages":"856-863"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12486532/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Comparative Volumetric Evaluation of Three Different Obturation Techniques in Primary Teeth: An <i>In Vitro</i> Study.\",\"authors\":\"Aswathy Subramanian, V P Kannan, Madhu Santhakumar\",\"doi\":\"10.5005/jp-journals-10005-3229\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The success of endodontic treatment in a primary teeth depends on good biomechanical preparation as well as the quality of obturation. In order to ensure this success, the properties of obturating material as well as the technique of insertion is crucial.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the quality of obturation with Pastinject and NaviTip to that of an endodontic plugger, using zinc oxide eugenol (ZOE) in extracted primary mandibular molars, with the assistance of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A total of 99 primary mandibular second molar root canals were selected, and 33 canals were randomly allocated in each obturating group by block randomization method: group I-endodontic pluggers; group II-NaviTip; and group III-Pastinject. The total volume of root canal before obturation (X) was measured in mm<sup>3</sup>. A homogeneous mixture of slow-setting ZOE was delivered using each technique. Following obturation, a second CBCT scan was done under the same parameters to determine the volume of the obturating material within the canal (Y mm<sup>3</sup>). The percentage of obturated volume (POV) within each canal and the volume of voids among the three groups were compared using Kruskal-Wallis test. Fisher's exact test was used to compare the number of optimally filled, overfilled, and underfilled canals among different groups.</p><p><strong>Results and discussion: </strong>The results of the present study showed significant difference between the three groups in terms of POV (<i>p</i> = 0.001) and volume of voids (<i>p</i> = 0.001), whereas no significant difference was found in terms of total number of voids (<i>p</i> = 0.491) and extent of fill (<i>p</i> = 0.152).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>It was concluded that Pastinject provided the best result with the highest POV and lowest volume of voids. Pastinject also had the least number of voids and maximum number of optimally filled canals.</p><p><strong>How to cite this article: </strong>Subramanian A, Kannan VP, Santhakumar M. A Comparative Volumetric Evaluation of Three Different Obturation Techniques in Primary Teeth: An <i>In Vitro</i> Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2025;18(7):856-863.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36045,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry\",\"volume\":\"18 7\",\"pages\":\"856-863\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12486532/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10005-3229\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/8/20 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Dentistry\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10005-3229","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/8/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:乳牙根管治疗的成功取决于良好的生物力学准备和封闭质量。为了保证这一成功,封闭材料的性能和插入技术是至关重要的。目的:本研究的目的是在锥形束计算机断层扫描(CBCT)的帮助下,评估和比较pasinject和NaviTip与使用氧化锌丁香酚(ZOE)的根管塞器对拔出的初级下颌磨牙的封闭质量。材料和方法:选择99根下颌第二磨牙根管,采用分组随机法随机分配33根根管,每组封闭:i组根管塞器;组II-NaviTip;第三组为pastinject。测量封闭前根管总容积(X),单位为mm3。每一种技术都提供了一种均匀的慢凝ZOE混合物。封闭后,在相同参数下进行第二次CBCT扫描,以确定管内封闭材料的体积(Y mm3)。采用Kruskal-Wallis试验比较三组患者各管内封闭体积(POV)百分比及空隙体积。Fisher精确检验用于比较不同组中最佳填充、过度填充和未充分填充的管道数量。结果与讨论:本研究结果显示三组间在POV (p = 0.001)和空隙体积(p = 0.001)方面差异有统计学意义,而在空隙总数(p = 0.491)和填充程度(p = 0.152)方面差异无统计学意义。结论:pas注射剂具有最高的POV和最小的空隙体积,效果最好。Pastinject也有最少的空隙和最多的最佳填充管。本文引用本文:Subramanian A, Kannan VP, Santhakumar M.三种不同的乳牙封闭技术的体积比较评价:体外研究。中华临床儿科杂志,2015;18(7):856-863。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

A Comparative Volumetric Evaluation of Three Different Obturation Techniques in Primary Teeth: An <i>In Vitro</i> Study.

A Comparative Volumetric Evaluation of Three Different Obturation Techniques in Primary Teeth: An <i>In Vitro</i> Study.

A Comparative Volumetric Evaluation of Three Different Obturation Techniques in Primary Teeth: An <i>In Vitro</i> Study.

A Comparative Volumetric Evaluation of Three Different Obturation Techniques in Primary Teeth: An In Vitro Study.

Background: The success of endodontic treatment in a primary teeth depends on good biomechanical preparation as well as the quality of obturation. In order to ensure this success, the properties of obturating material as well as the technique of insertion is crucial.

Aims: The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the quality of obturation with Pastinject and NaviTip to that of an endodontic plugger, using zinc oxide eugenol (ZOE) in extracted primary mandibular molars, with the assistance of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT).

Materials and methods: A total of 99 primary mandibular second molar root canals were selected, and 33 canals were randomly allocated in each obturating group by block randomization method: group I-endodontic pluggers; group II-NaviTip; and group III-Pastinject. The total volume of root canal before obturation (X) was measured in mm3. A homogeneous mixture of slow-setting ZOE was delivered using each technique. Following obturation, a second CBCT scan was done under the same parameters to determine the volume of the obturating material within the canal (Y mm3). The percentage of obturated volume (POV) within each canal and the volume of voids among the three groups were compared using Kruskal-Wallis test. Fisher's exact test was used to compare the number of optimally filled, overfilled, and underfilled canals among different groups.

Results and discussion: The results of the present study showed significant difference between the three groups in terms of POV (p = 0.001) and volume of voids (p = 0.001), whereas no significant difference was found in terms of total number of voids (p = 0.491) and extent of fill (p = 0.152).

Conclusion: It was concluded that Pastinject provided the best result with the highest POV and lowest volume of voids. Pastinject also had the least number of voids and maximum number of optimally filled canals.

How to cite this article: Subramanian A, Kannan VP, Santhakumar M. A Comparative Volumetric Evaluation of Three Different Obturation Techniques in Primary Teeth: An In Vitro Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2025;18(7):856-863.

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
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
135
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信