{"title":"两种纤维增强支架去除技术的效果评价。","authors":"A AlShabib, S Brindley, J Satterthwaite","doi":"10.1922/EJPRD_02101AlShabib06","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of this in-vitro study was to compare the amount of material (post and luting agent) and root dentine removed using two methods for removal of endodontic posts.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Human premolar teeth (n=20) were sectioned at the CEJ and fibre reinforced posts were cemented at a length of 10mm following root canal therapy. Teeth were randomly assigned to two study groups. The methods of removal compared were: the use of RTD re-access kit (Composipost, RTD, France, St Egreve) in a conventional hand-piece driven by an electric motor (Group A); or a long tapered diamond bur (FG Diamond grit bur, Dentsply Ltd, UK) in an air-driven high speed turbine (Group B). Using micro- CT the volume of material and root dentine removed for each sample was calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both the volume of material removed and the volume of root dentine removed were significantly greater when using diamond burs. (p⟨0.001). The volume of dentine removed using the diamond bur method (mean 22.64mm³) was greater than the volume removed using the reaccess kit (mean 11.71mm³).</p><p><strong>Significance: </strong>Use of a diamond bur to remove fibre reinforced endodontic post removal poses higher risk for root perforation compared to the reaccess kit.</p>","PeriodicalId":45686,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of the Efficacy of Two Fibre-Reinforced Post Removal Techniques.\",\"authors\":\"A AlShabib, S Brindley, J Satterthwaite\",\"doi\":\"10.1922/EJPRD_02101AlShabib06\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of this in-vitro study was to compare the amount of material (post and luting agent) and root dentine removed using two methods for removal of endodontic posts.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Human premolar teeth (n=20) were sectioned at the CEJ and fibre reinforced posts were cemented at a length of 10mm following root canal therapy. Teeth were randomly assigned to two study groups. The methods of removal compared were: the use of RTD re-access kit (Composipost, RTD, France, St Egreve) in a conventional hand-piece driven by an electric motor (Group A); or a long tapered diamond bur (FG Diamond grit bur, Dentsply Ltd, UK) in an air-driven high speed turbine (Group B). Using micro- CT the volume of material and root dentine removed for each sample was calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both the volume of material removed and the volume of root dentine removed were significantly greater when using diamond burs. (p⟨0.001). The volume of dentine removed using the diamond bur method (mean 22.64mm³) was greater than the volume removed using the reaccess kit (mean 11.71mm³).</p><p><strong>Significance: </strong>Use of a diamond bur to remove fibre reinforced endodontic post removal poses higher risk for root perforation compared to the reaccess kit.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45686,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1922/EJPRD_02101AlShabib06\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1922/EJPRD_02101AlShabib06","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
摘要
目的:比较两种根管桩拔除方法所去除的材料(桩体和拔除剂)和根本质的数量。方法:在根管治疗后，将20颗人前磨牙在CEJ处切开，纤维增强桩在10mm处粘接。牙齿被随机分为两个研究组。比较的去除方法是:在由电动机驱动的传统手件(a组)中使用RTD重新访问套件(Composipost, RTD, France, St Egreve);或在空气驱动的高速涡轮(B组)中使用长锥形金刚石钻头(FG diamond grit bur, Dentsply Ltd, UK)。使用micro- CT计算每个样品去除的材料和根本质的体积。结果:金刚石毛刺去除的材料体积和去除的牙根本质体积都明显大于金刚石毛刺。(p⟨0.001)。使用金刚石钻法去除的牙本质体积(平均22.64mm³)大于使用再接触套件去除的体积(平均11.71mm³)。意义:与再入工具相比，使用金刚石牙棒去除纤维增强根管拔桩会增加根穿孔的风险。
Evaluation of the Efficacy of Two Fibre-Reinforced Post Removal Techniques.
Objective: The aim of this in-vitro study was to compare the amount of material (post and luting agent) and root dentine removed using two methods for removal of endodontic posts.
Methods: Human premolar teeth (n=20) were sectioned at the CEJ and fibre reinforced posts were cemented at a length of 10mm following root canal therapy. Teeth were randomly assigned to two study groups. The methods of removal compared were: the use of RTD re-access kit (Composipost, RTD, France, St Egreve) in a conventional hand-piece driven by an electric motor (Group A); or a long tapered diamond bur (FG Diamond grit bur, Dentsply Ltd, UK) in an air-driven high speed turbine (Group B). Using micro- CT the volume of material and root dentine removed for each sample was calculated.
Results: Both the volume of material removed and the volume of root dentine removed were significantly greater when using diamond burs. (p⟨0.001). The volume of dentine removed using the diamond bur method (mean 22.64mm³) was greater than the volume removed using the reaccess kit (mean 11.71mm³).
Significance: Use of a diamond bur to remove fibre reinforced endodontic post removal poses higher risk for root perforation compared to the reaccess kit.
期刊介绍：
The European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry is published quarterly and includes clinical and research articles in subjects such as prosthodontics, operative dentistry, implantology, endodontics, periodontics and dental materials.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
