临时修复性牙髓材料的边缘稳定性和渗透性评估

Reza B. Kazemi DMD , Kamran E. Safavi DMD, MEd , Larz S.W. Spangberg DDS, PhD
{"title":"临时修复性牙髓材料的边缘稳定性和渗透性评估","authors":"Reza B. Kazemi DMD ,&nbsp;Kamran E. Safavi DMD, MEd ,&nbsp;Larz S.W. Spangberg DDS, PhD","doi":"10.1016/0030-4220(94)90097-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The purpose of this study was to assess the marginal stability and permeability of a new interim restorative endodontic material, Tempit (Centrix Inc., Milford, Conn.), and to compare the findings with the results of two commonly used restorative endodontic materials, Cavit (Premier Dental Products Co., Philadelphia, Pa.) and IRM (Intermediate Restorative Material Capsules, The Caulk Co., Division of Dentsply International Inc., Milford, Del.) This study was performed in several steps. First, the endodontic access cavities were prepared and restored on 80 extracted mandibular molars. The samples were exposed to methylene blue dye solution for 6 days, thermocycled, and sectioned; the dye penetration and diffusion were measured along the margins and into the body of the materials. The second experiment was a special study performed in standardized glass tubes to better evaluate the marginal and body dye penetration into the materials by increasing the length of the fillings. To eliminate the possibility of phygroscopic setting mechanisms of materials, samples were first allowed to set under water before dye was introduced. Cavit and Tempit showed a substantial amount of dye diffusion into the body of the materials. Cavit exhibited the best sealing ability at all times. The marginal and body dye penetration were significantly different for the Tempit material in all experiments than Cavit (<em>p</em> &lt; 0.001). IRM demonstrated the least body penetration of all three materials (<em>p</em> &lt; 0.001) but had a substantial marginal leakage not significantly different from the results of the Tempit material (<em>p</em> = 0.6 and <em>p</em> = 0.1). Preset and postset samples of Cavit and Tempit materials exhibited no significant changes in their behavior with respect to the dye diffusion. On the basis of the findings in this study, Tempit and IRM seem less appropriate as interim endodontic restorations compared with Cavit.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100992,"journal":{"name":"Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology","volume":"78 6","pages":"Pages 788-796"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1994-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/0030-4220(94)90097-3","citationCount":"38","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessment of marginal stability and permeability of an interim restorative endodontic material\",\"authors\":\"Reza B. Kazemi DMD ,&nbsp;Kamran E. Safavi DMD, MEd ,&nbsp;Larz S.W. Spangberg DDS, PhD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/0030-4220(94)90097-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The purpose of this study was to assess the marginal stability and permeability of a new interim restorative endodontic material, Tempit (Centrix Inc., Milford, Conn.), and to compare the findings with the results of two commonly used restorative endodontic materials, Cavit (Premier Dental Products Co., Philadelphia, Pa.) and IRM (Intermediate Restorative Material Capsules, The Caulk Co., Division of Dentsply International Inc., Milford, Del.) This study was performed in several steps. First, the endodontic access cavities were prepared and restored on 80 extracted mandibular molars. The samples were exposed to methylene blue dye solution for 6 days, thermocycled, and sectioned; the dye penetration and diffusion were measured along the margins and into the body of the materials. The second experiment was a special study performed in standardized glass tubes to better evaluate the marginal and body dye penetration into the materials by increasing the length of the fillings. To eliminate the possibility of phygroscopic setting mechanisms of materials, samples were first allowed to set under water before dye was introduced. Cavit and Tempit showed a substantial amount of dye diffusion into the body of the materials. Cavit exhibited the best sealing ability at all times. The marginal and body dye penetration were significantly different for the Tempit material in all experiments than Cavit (<em>p</em> &lt; 0.001). IRM demonstrated the least body penetration of all three materials (<em>p</em> &lt; 0.001) but had a substantial marginal leakage not significantly different from the results of the Tempit material (<em>p</em> = 0.6 and <em>p</em> = 0.1). Preset and postset samples of Cavit and Tempit materials exhibited no significant changes in their behavior with respect to the dye diffusion. On the basis of the findings in this study, Tempit and IRM seem less appropriate as interim endodontic restorations compared with Cavit.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100992,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology\",\"volume\":\"78 6\",\"pages\":\"Pages 788-796\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1994-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/0030-4220(94)90097-3\",\"citationCount\":\"38\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0030422094900973\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0030422094900973","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 38

摘要

本研究的目的是评估一种新的临时牙髓修复材料Tempit (Centrix公司,康涅狄格州米尔福德)的边缘稳定性和渗透性,并将结果与两种常用的牙髓修复材料Cavit(宾夕法尼亚州费城Premier Dental Products公司)和IRM(中间修复材料胶囊,The Caulk公司,Dentsply International Inc.分部,特拉华州米尔福德)的结果进行比较。这项研究分几个步骤进行。首先在80颗拔除的下颌磨牙上制备并修复根管通道。样品暴露于亚甲基蓝染料溶液中6天,热循环,切片;染料的渗透和扩散沿边缘和进入材料的主体测量。第二个实验是在标准化玻璃管中进行的一项特殊研究,通过增加填充物的长度来更好地评估边缘和主体染料对材料的渗透。为了消除材料吸湿性凝固机制的可能性,在引入染料之前,首先允许样品在水下凝固。Cavit和Tempit显示大量的染料扩散到材料体内。空腔在各时段均表现出最佳的密封能力。在所有实验中,Tempit材料的边缘和体染料穿透率与Cavit材料有显著差异(p <0.001)。IRM显示出三种材料中最小的体穿透(p <0.001),但与Tempit材料的结果没有显著差异(p = 0.6和p = 0.1)。Cavit和Tempit材料的预设和后置样品在染料扩散方面没有显着变化。根据本研究结果,Tempit和IRM与Cavit相比似乎不太适合作为临时牙髓修复体。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Assessment of marginal stability and permeability of an interim restorative endodontic material

The purpose of this study was to assess the marginal stability and permeability of a new interim restorative endodontic material, Tempit (Centrix Inc., Milford, Conn.), and to compare the findings with the results of two commonly used restorative endodontic materials, Cavit (Premier Dental Products Co., Philadelphia, Pa.) and IRM (Intermediate Restorative Material Capsules, The Caulk Co., Division of Dentsply International Inc., Milford, Del.) This study was performed in several steps. First, the endodontic access cavities were prepared and restored on 80 extracted mandibular molars. The samples were exposed to methylene blue dye solution for 6 days, thermocycled, and sectioned; the dye penetration and diffusion were measured along the margins and into the body of the materials. The second experiment was a special study performed in standardized glass tubes to better evaluate the marginal and body dye penetration into the materials by increasing the length of the fillings. To eliminate the possibility of phygroscopic setting mechanisms of materials, samples were first allowed to set under water before dye was introduced. Cavit and Tempit showed a substantial amount of dye diffusion into the body of the materials. Cavit exhibited the best sealing ability at all times. The marginal and body dye penetration were significantly different for the Tempit material in all experiments than Cavit (p < 0.001). IRM demonstrated the least body penetration of all three materials (p < 0.001) but had a substantial marginal leakage not significantly different from the results of the Tempit material (p = 0.6 and p = 0.1). Preset and postset samples of Cavit and Tempit materials exhibited no significant changes in their behavior with respect to the dye diffusion. On the basis of the findings in this study, Tempit and IRM seem less appropriate as interim endodontic restorations compared with Cavit.

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
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