{"title":"偏置和交替接触牙髓旋转锉诱发的牙本质缺损:体外研究","authors":"A. Abass, Haidar Fadhil, F. Albaaj","doi":"10.4103/denthyp.denthyp_138_21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: Dentinal defects during root canal preparation could lead to treatment failure and tooth extraction. Many rotary files are manufactured with asymmetric cross sections or alternating cutting edges to minimize contact with the canal wall. Decreasing contacts may generate low stresses and, hence, fewer dental defects during root canal instrumentation. This study aimed to evaluate the incidence of dentinal defects induced by ProTaper Next, Wave One Gold (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland), and iRace (FKG Dentaire SA, La Chaux-de-Fonds, Switzerland) in comparison to the symmetric file HyFlex CM (Coltene-Whaledent, Allstetten, Switzerland). Materials and Methods: Sixty extracted single-rooted premolars with round canals were selected for this study. All teeth were decoronated and divided into four experimental groups according to the tested file systems. In each group, 15 canals were prepared with the crown down technique using a speed and torque recommended by manufacturers. The root samples were then sectioned horizontally at 3, 6, and 9 mm from the apex and examined under a stereomicroscope to evaluate the presence or absence of dentinal defects. Data were statistically analyzed with SPSS software using a chi-square test. Results: Dentinal defects were observed at all canal levels following all methods of instrumentation. ProTaper Next showed the lowest values of dentinal defects, whereas Hyflex CM displayed the highest values. Conclusion: Files with few contacts with the canal wall decreased the number of dentinal defects compared to the HyFlex CM file, with a nonsignificant difference being observed.","PeriodicalId":43354,"journal":{"name":"Dental Hypotheses","volume":"13 1","pages":"53 - 56"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dentinal Defects Induced by Offset and Alternating Contact Endodontic Rotary Files: An In Vitro Study\",\"authors\":\"A. Abass, Haidar Fadhil, F. Albaaj\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/denthyp.denthyp_138_21\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective: Dentinal defects during root canal preparation could lead to treatment failure and tooth extraction. Many rotary files are manufactured with asymmetric cross sections or alternating cutting edges to minimize contact with the canal wall. Decreasing contacts may generate low stresses and, hence, fewer dental defects during root canal instrumentation. This study aimed to evaluate the incidence of dentinal defects induced by ProTaper Next, Wave One Gold (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland), and iRace (FKG Dentaire SA, La Chaux-de-Fonds, Switzerland) in comparison to the symmetric file HyFlex CM (Coltene-Whaledent, Allstetten, Switzerland). Materials and Methods: Sixty extracted single-rooted premolars with round canals were selected for this study. All teeth were decoronated and divided into four experimental groups according to the tested file systems. In each group, 15 canals were prepared with the crown down technique using a speed and torque recommended by manufacturers. The root samples were then sectioned horizontally at 3, 6, and 9 mm from the apex and examined under a stereomicroscope to evaluate the presence or absence of dentinal defects. Data were statistically analyzed with SPSS software using a chi-square test. Results: Dentinal defects were observed at all canal levels following all methods of instrumentation. ProTaper Next showed the lowest values of dentinal defects, whereas Hyflex CM displayed the highest values. Conclusion: Files with few contacts with the canal wall decreased the number of dentinal defects compared to the HyFlex CM file, with a nonsignificant difference being observed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43354,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Dental Hypotheses\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"53 - 56\"},\"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_138_21\",\"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_138_21","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
目的:根管预备过程中牙本质缺损可能导致治疗失败而导致拔牙。许多旋转锉采用不对称截面或交替切削刃制造,以尽量减少与管壁的接触。减少接触可以产生较低的应力,因此在根管预备过程中可以减少牙齿缺陷。本研究旨在评估ProTaper Next, Wave One Gold (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland)和iRace (FKG Dentaire SA, La Chaux-de-Fonds, Switzerland)与对称锉HyFlex CM (Coltene-Whaledent, Allstetten, Switzerland)所引起的牙本质缺损的发生率。材料与方法:选择60颗拔除的单根圆管前磨牙作为研究对象。所有的牙齿进行装饰,并根据测试的文件系统分为四个实验组。在每组中,使用制造商推荐的速度和扭矩采用冠下技术准备15根根管。然后将牙根样本在离牙尖3、6和9毫米处水平切片,在体视显微镜下检查是否存在牙本质缺陷。数据采用SPSS软件进行统计学分析,采用卡方检验。结果:采用所有固定方法,在所有根管水平均观察到牙本质缺损。ProTaper Next的牙本质缺损值最低,Hyflex CM的牙本质缺损值最高。结论:与HyFlex CM锉相比,与管壁接触较少的锉减少了牙本质缺陷的数量,但差异无统计学意义。
Dentinal Defects Induced by Offset and Alternating Contact Endodontic Rotary Files: An In Vitro Study
Objective: Dentinal defects during root canal preparation could lead to treatment failure and tooth extraction. Many rotary files are manufactured with asymmetric cross sections or alternating cutting edges to minimize contact with the canal wall. Decreasing contacts may generate low stresses and, hence, fewer dental defects during root canal instrumentation. This study aimed to evaluate the incidence of dentinal defects induced by ProTaper Next, Wave One Gold (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland), and iRace (FKG Dentaire SA, La Chaux-de-Fonds, Switzerland) in comparison to the symmetric file HyFlex CM (Coltene-Whaledent, Allstetten, Switzerland). Materials and Methods: Sixty extracted single-rooted premolars with round canals were selected for this study. All teeth were decoronated and divided into four experimental groups according to the tested file systems. In each group, 15 canals were prepared with the crown down technique using a speed and torque recommended by manufacturers. The root samples were then sectioned horizontally at 3, 6, and 9 mm from the apex and examined under a stereomicroscope to evaluate the presence or absence of dentinal defects. Data were statistically analyzed with SPSS software using a chi-square test. Results: Dentinal defects were observed at all canal levels following all methods of instrumentation. ProTaper Next showed the lowest values of dentinal defects, whereas Hyflex CM displayed the highest values. Conclusion: Files with few contacts with the canal wall decreased the number of dentinal defects compared to the HyFlex CM file, with a nonsignificant difference being observed.