不同器械在制剂后立即机械去除涂抹层的效果:比较研究。

Marcela L Roitman, Laura B Pinasco, Romina Loiacono, Valeria C Panetta, Carolina A Anaise, Pablo A Rodríguez
{"title":"不同器械在制剂后立即机械去除涂抹层的效果:比较研究。","authors":"Marcela L Roitman,&nbsp;Laura B Pinasco,&nbsp;Romina Loiacono,&nbsp;Valeria C Panetta,&nbsp;Carolina A Anaise,&nbsp;Pablo A Rodríguez","doi":"10.54589/aol.34/2/166","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Adhesively cemented fiber-reinforced composite posts are commonly used to reconstruct endodontically treated teeth. Adhesion to intraradicular dentin is complex, and close contact between the resin cements and the dentin is essential. The removal of the smear layer following post space preparation (secondary smear layer) can improve this integration. Different mechanical systems have been used to activate the irrigant inside the root canal. The purpose of this study was to compare, ex-vivo, the removal of the smear layer from the walls of the immediate post space preparation by the action of three mechanized instruments. Forty premolar specimens with a single root canal were selected, endodontically treated, and shaped for glass fiber post cementation with Peeso reamer #1 (Dentsply Sirona, Switzerland) and Macrolock finishing drill #3 (RTD, France). The specimens were randomly divided into 4 groups (n=10): Group C (control); Group PUI (passive ultrasonic irrigation); Group CEP (Rotoprox brush, Hager Werken, Germany) and Group XP (XP-endo Finisher, FKG Dentaire, Switzerland). Post space surfaces were cleaned with 3mL of distilled water; each specimen root split longitudinally to expose the root canals, and prepared for examination in a scanning electron microscope at magnification 350X. The results were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis and Friedman tests (p>0.05). RESULTS: Statistically significant differences (p<0.05) were found between Groups C and XP in all three root regions, but not between Groups C, CEP and PIU. Of these, Group CEP showed a better trend in the results of the coronary and middle thirds, without significant difference with Group XP. Although it was difficult to achieve a clean dentin surface after preparation for the fiberglass post, the XP-endo Finisher was the most efficient in removing secondary smear layer, followed by the Rotoprox conical brush.</p>","PeriodicalId":7033,"journal":{"name":"Acta odontologica latinoamericana : AOL","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/a8/43/1852-4834-34-2-166.PMC10315072.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy of different instruments for the mechanical removal of the smear layer in immediate post preparations: a comparative study.\",\"authors\":\"Marcela L Roitman,&nbsp;Laura B Pinasco,&nbsp;Romina Loiacono,&nbsp;Valeria C Panetta,&nbsp;Carolina A Anaise,&nbsp;Pablo A Rodríguez\",\"doi\":\"10.54589/aol.34/2/166\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Adhesively cemented fiber-reinforced composite posts are commonly used to reconstruct endodontically treated teeth. Adhesion to intraradicular dentin is complex, and close contact between the resin cements and the dentin is essential. The removal of the smear layer following post space preparation (secondary smear layer) can improve this integration. Different mechanical systems have been used to activate the irrigant inside the root canal. The purpose of this study was to compare, ex-vivo, the removal of the smear layer from the walls of the immediate post space preparation by the action of three mechanized instruments. Forty premolar specimens with a single root canal were selected, endodontically treated, and shaped for glass fiber post cementation with Peeso reamer #1 (Dentsply Sirona, Switzerland) and Macrolock finishing drill #3 (RTD, France). The specimens were randomly divided into 4 groups (n=10): Group C (control); Group PUI (passive ultrasonic irrigation); Group CEP (Rotoprox brush, Hager Werken, Germany) and Group XP (XP-endo Finisher, FKG Dentaire, Switzerland). Post space surfaces were cleaned with 3mL of distilled water; each specimen root split longitudinally to expose the root canals, and prepared for examination in a scanning electron microscope at magnification 350X. The results were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis and Friedman tests (p>0.05). RESULTS: Statistically significant differences (p<0.05) were found between Groups C and XP in all three root regions, but not between Groups C, CEP and PIU. Of these, Group CEP showed a better trend in the results of the coronary and middle thirds, without significant difference with Group XP. Although it was difficult to achieve a clean dentin surface after preparation for the fiberglass post, the XP-endo Finisher was the most efficient in removing secondary smear layer, followed by the Rotoprox conical brush.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7033,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta odontologica latinoamericana : AOL\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/a8/43/1852-4834-34-2-166.PMC10315072.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta odontologica latinoamericana : AOL\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54589/aol.34/2/166\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta odontologica latinoamericana : AOL","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54589/aol.34/2/166","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

粘接胶结纤维增强复合桩通常用于重建根管治疗的牙齿。与根状牙本质的粘附是复杂的,树脂胶合剂与牙本质的紧密接触是必不可少的。在后空间制备(二次涂抹层)之后去除涂抹层可以改善这种集成。不同的机械系统被用来激活根管内的冲洗剂。本研究的目的是比较在离体情况下,通过三种机械器械的作用,将涂抹层从即位空间制备的壁上去除。选择40个具有单根管的前磨牙标本,进行根管治疗,并使用Peeso 1号扩眼器(Dentsply Sirona,瑞士)和Macrolock 3号精加工钻(RTD,法国)进行玻璃纤维桩固接。将标本随机分为4组(n=10): C组(对照组);PUI组(被动超声灌洗);CEP集团(Rotoprox牙刷,Hager Werken,德国)和XP集团(XP-endo精加工,FKG Dentaire,瑞士)。立柱空间表面用3mL蒸馏水清洗;每个标本根纵向裂开,露出根管,准备在350倍扫描电子显微镜下检查。采用Kruskal-Wallis和Friedman检验对结果进行分析(p>0.05)。结果:差异有统计学意义(p
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Efficacy of different instruments for the mechanical removal of the smear layer in immediate post preparations: a comparative study.

Efficacy of different instruments for the mechanical removal of the smear layer in immediate post preparations: a comparative study.

Efficacy of different instruments for the mechanical removal of the smear layer in immediate post preparations: a comparative study.

Efficacy of different instruments for the mechanical removal of the smear layer in immediate post preparations: a comparative study.

Adhesively cemented fiber-reinforced composite posts are commonly used to reconstruct endodontically treated teeth. Adhesion to intraradicular dentin is complex, and close contact between the resin cements and the dentin is essential. The removal of the smear layer following post space preparation (secondary smear layer) can improve this integration. Different mechanical systems have been used to activate the irrigant inside the root canal. The purpose of this study was to compare, ex-vivo, the removal of the smear layer from the walls of the immediate post space preparation by the action of three mechanized instruments. Forty premolar specimens with a single root canal were selected, endodontically treated, and shaped for glass fiber post cementation with Peeso reamer #1 (Dentsply Sirona, Switzerland) and Macrolock finishing drill #3 (RTD, France). The specimens were randomly divided into 4 groups (n=10): Group C (control); Group PUI (passive ultrasonic irrigation); Group CEP (Rotoprox brush, Hager Werken, Germany) and Group XP (XP-endo Finisher, FKG Dentaire, Switzerland). Post space surfaces were cleaned with 3mL of distilled water; each specimen root split longitudinally to expose the root canals, and prepared for examination in a scanning electron microscope at magnification 350X. The results were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis and Friedman tests (p>0.05). RESULTS: Statistically significant differences (p<0.05) were found between Groups C and XP in all three root regions, but not between Groups C, CEP and PIU. Of these, Group CEP showed a better trend in the results of the coronary and middle thirds, without significant difference with Group XP. Although it was difficult to achieve a clean dentin surface after preparation for the fiberglass post, the XP-endo Finisher was the most efficient in removing secondary smear layer, followed by the Rotoprox conical brush.

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