往复式单锉系统、连续旋转多锉系统和手动技术对根管预备过程中顶端挤出碎屑的定量评价:体外研究

Q3 Dentistry
Pratima Mohana, D. Abraham, Alka Gurawa, Alpa Gupta, P. Chauhan, Arundeep Singh, Sucheta Jala
{"title":"往复式单锉系统、连续旋转多锉系统和手动技术对根管预备过程中顶端挤出碎屑的定量评价:体外研究","authors":"Pratima Mohana, D. Abraham, Alka Gurawa, Alpa Gupta, P. Chauhan, Arundeep Singh, Sucheta Jala","doi":"10.4103/endo.endo_167_21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: The aim of the study is to evaluate and compare the quantity of apical debris extrusion from the root canals during biomechanical preparation by various rotary (reciprocating, Protaper Next [PTN] continuous) and manual hand filing system and by means of Crown-Down and Step Back techniques. Materials and Methods: Eighty mature, human mandibular premolars with single canals were randomly divided into four groups of twenty teeth each. Each group was instrumented using one of the four instrumentation systems: Group A: WaveOne, Group B: PTN, Group C: Hand file with Crown Down, Group D: Hand file with Step Back. Extruded debris was collected in preweighed Eppendorf tubes and the extruded irrigant was evaporated. The weight of the dry extruded debris was established by comparing the pre and post-instrumentation weight of Eppendorf tubes for each group. Results: Mean comparison of groups in different instrumentation by ANOVA presented that hand file with Step-Back technique is showed maximum amount of apical extrusion debris and continuous rotary file system showed the minimum amount of extrusion debris (P < 0.001). Conclusions: The current ex vivo study demonstrated reciprocating single file WaveOne and continuous rotary multiple file system lead to significantly less debris extrusion than manual hand file techniques. Reciprocating single file WaveOne extruded more debris than continuous rotary PTN multiple file system. More amount of debris was extruded in the group with Step-Back hand filing than Crown-Down technique.","PeriodicalId":11607,"journal":{"name":"Endodontology","volume":"34 1","pages":"80 - 85"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Quantitative evaluation of apically extruded debris during root canal preparation with reciprocating single file system, continuous rotary multiple file system and manual technique: An in vitro study\",\"authors\":\"Pratima Mohana, D. Abraham, Alka Gurawa, Alpa Gupta, P. Chauhan, Arundeep Singh, Sucheta Jala\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/endo.endo_167_21\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Aim: The aim of the study is to evaluate and compare the quantity of apical debris extrusion from the root canals during biomechanical preparation by various rotary (reciprocating, Protaper Next [PTN] continuous) and manual hand filing system and by means of Crown-Down and Step Back techniques. Materials and Methods: Eighty mature, human mandibular premolars with single canals were randomly divided into four groups of twenty teeth each. Each group was instrumented using one of the four instrumentation systems: Group A: WaveOne, Group B: PTN, Group C: Hand file with Crown Down, Group D: Hand file with Step Back. Extruded debris was collected in preweighed Eppendorf tubes and the extruded irrigant was evaporated. The weight of the dry extruded debris was established by comparing the pre and post-instrumentation weight of Eppendorf tubes for each group. Results: Mean comparison of groups in different instrumentation by ANOVA presented that hand file with Step-Back technique is showed maximum amount of apical extrusion debris and continuous rotary file system showed the minimum amount of extrusion debris (P < 0.001). Conclusions: The current ex vivo study demonstrated reciprocating single file WaveOne and continuous rotary multiple file system lead to significantly less debris extrusion than manual hand file techniques. Reciprocating single file WaveOne extruded more debris than continuous rotary PTN multiple file system. More amount of debris was extruded in the group with Step-Back hand filing than Crown-Down technique.\",\"PeriodicalId\":11607,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Endodontology\",\"volume\":\"34 1\",\"pages\":\"80 - 85\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Endodontology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/endo.endo_167_21\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Dentistry\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Endodontology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/endo.endo_167_21","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究的目的是评估和比较在生物力学准备过程中,通过各种旋转(往复,Protaper Next [PTN]连续)和手动锉制系统以及Crown-Down和Step - Back技术,从根管中挤出根尖碎片的数量。材料与方法:80颗成年单根管的人下颌前磨牙随机分为4组,每组20颗。每组使用四种仪器系统中的一种进行仪器测量:A组:WaveOne, B组:PTN, C组:Crown Down Hand锉,D组:Step Back Hand锉。挤压后的碎屑被收集在预称重的艾朋多夫管中,挤压后的冲洗液被蒸发。通过比较各组埃彭多夫管测量前和测量后的重量来确定干挤压碎片的重量。结果:经方差分析,不同器械组间的平均比较显示,采用步退技术的手锉产生的根尖挤压碎屑最多,连续旋转锉产生的根尖挤压碎屑最少(P < 0.001)。结论:目前的离体研究表明,往复单锉WaveOne和连续旋转多锉系统比手工锉技术明显减少了碎片挤压。往复单文件WaveOne比连续旋转PTN多文件系统挤出更多的碎片。Step-Back hand锉组比Crown-Down锉组挤压出更多的碎片。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Quantitative evaluation of apically extruded debris during root canal preparation with reciprocating single file system, continuous rotary multiple file system and manual technique: An in vitro study
Aim: The aim of the study is to evaluate and compare the quantity of apical debris extrusion from the root canals during biomechanical preparation by various rotary (reciprocating, Protaper Next [PTN] continuous) and manual hand filing system and by means of Crown-Down and Step Back techniques. Materials and Methods: Eighty mature, human mandibular premolars with single canals were randomly divided into four groups of twenty teeth each. Each group was instrumented using one of the four instrumentation systems: Group A: WaveOne, Group B: PTN, Group C: Hand file with Crown Down, Group D: Hand file with Step Back. Extruded debris was collected in preweighed Eppendorf tubes and the extruded irrigant was evaporated. The weight of the dry extruded debris was established by comparing the pre and post-instrumentation weight of Eppendorf tubes for each group. Results: Mean comparison of groups in different instrumentation by ANOVA presented that hand file with Step-Back technique is showed maximum amount of apical extrusion debris and continuous rotary file system showed the minimum amount of extrusion debris (P < 0.001). Conclusions: The current ex vivo study demonstrated reciprocating single file WaveOne and continuous rotary multiple file system lead to significantly less debris extrusion than manual hand file techniques. Reciprocating single file WaveOne extruded more debris than continuous rotary PTN multiple file system. More amount of debris was extruded in the group with Step-Back hand filing than Crown-Down technique.
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
Endodontology
Endodontology Medicine-Anatomy
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
28 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