两种封闭剂对根管治疗后根抗折性的比较研究

IF 0.6 Q4 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
N. Hajihassani, S. Heidari, M. Ghanati, Navid Mohammadi
{"title":"两种封闭剂对根管治疗后根抗折性的比较研究","authors":"N. Hajihassani, S. Heidari, M. Ghanati, Navid Mohammadi","doi":"10.4103/denthyp.denthyp_29_22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: This study aimed to compare the fracture resistance using a bioceramic sealer and an epoxy resin-based sealer. Materials and Methods: One hundred maxillary central incisors were randomly assigned to three experimental groups: AH Plus sealer using the single-cone technique, AH Plus sealer using the lateral compaction technique, SureSeal Root sealer, and two positive and negative control groups. Then the fracture resistance of the prepared tooth roots was determined. The data were analyzed with one-way ANOVA and Tukey Post Hoc tests. Results: There were statistically significant differences between the five study groups (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the negative control and Sureseal groups (P = 0.183). There were significant differences between the SureSeal and AH Plus groups (P < 0.05). Conclusion: SureSeal Root sealer significantly increased the fracture resistance of the teeth compared to AH Plus sealer.","PeriodicalId":43354,"journal":{"name":"Dental Hypotheses","volume":"13 1","pages":"45 - 48"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Fracture Resistance of the Endodontically Treated Roots with Two Sealer Types: An In Vitro Study\",\"authors\":\"N. Hajihassani, S. Heidari, M. Ghanati, Navid Mohammadi\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/denthyp.denthyp_29_22\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction: This study aimed to compare the fracture resistance using a bioceramic sealer and an epoxy resin-based sealer. Materials and Methods: One hundred maxillary central incisors were randomly assigned to three experimental groups: AH Plus sealer using the single-cone technique, AH Plus sealer using the lateral compaction technique, SureSeal Root sealer, and two positive and negative control groups. Then the fracture resistance of the prepared tooth roots was determined. The data were analyzed with one-way ANOVA and Tukey Post Hoc tests. Results: There were statistically significant differences between the five study groups (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the negative control and Sureseal groups (P = 0.183). There were significant differences between the SureSeal and AH Plus groups (P < 0.05). Conclusion: SureSeal Root sealer significantly increased the fracture resistance of the teeth compared to AH Plus sealer.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43354,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Dental Hypotheses\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"45 - 48\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Dental Hypotheses\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/denthyp.denthyp_29_22\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dental Hypotheses","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/denthyp.denthyp_29_22","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:本研究旨在比较生物陶瓷密封剂和环氧树脂密封剂的抗断裂性能。材料与方法:100个上颌中切牙随机分为3个实验组:AH +单锥体封闭术组、AH +侧压实术组、SureSeal牙根封闭术组和阳性对照组和阴性对照组。然后测定了制备的牙根的抗断裂能力。数据分析采用单因素方差分析和Tukey事后检验。结果:5个研究组间差异有统计学意义(P < 0.001)。阴性对照组与Sureseal组间差异无统计学意义(P = 0.183)。SureSeal组与AH Plus组比较差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。结论:与AH Plus根管封闭剂相比,SureSeal根管封闭剂明显提高了牙齿的抗折断性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of Fracture Resistance of the Endodontically Treated Roots with Two Sealer Types: An In Vitro Study
Introduction: This study aimed to compare the fracture resistance using a bioceramic sealer and an epoxy resin-based sealer. Materials and Methods: One hundred maxillary central incisors were randomly assigned to three experimental groups: AH Plus sealer using the single-cone technique, AH Plus sealer using the lateral compaction technique, SureSeal Root sealer, and two positive and negative control groups. Then the fracture resistance of the prepared tooth roots was determined. The data were analyzed with one-way ANOVA and Tukey Post Hoc tests. Results: There were statistically significant differences between the five study groups (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the negative control and Sureseal groups (P = 0.183). There were significant differences between the SureSeal and AH Plus groups (P < 0.05). Conclusion: SureSeal Root sealer significantly increased the fracture resistance of the teeth compared to AH Plus sealer.
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
Dental Hypotheses
Dental Hypotheses DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
审稿时长
21 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