不同机用镍钛器械在树脂模拟根管内成形能力的比较
|
摘要
目的比较3种机用镍钛器械在预备树脂模拟弯曲根管时的成形能力,以期为临床提供参考。方法将48个树脂模拟弯曲根管随机分为4组,每组12个,分别使用F360(组1)、F6 SkyTaper(20/06)(组2)、F6 SkyTaper(25/06)(组3)、Reciproc R25(组4)进行根管预备,使用体视显微镜拍摄预备前后的根管图像,利用Photoshop软件进行图像重叠,以根尖孔为圆心,每隔1 mm作一同心圆,测量根管内外侧壁树脂去除量,计算中心定位能力。使用SPSS 20.0软件进行统计学分析。结果在距根尖孔1 mm位点,组4的偏移程度为(0.10±0.03)mm,显著大于组2的(0.05±0.03)mm和组3的(0.05±0.03)mm(P <0.05);在距根尖孔8 mm和9mm处,组4的偏移程度分别为(0.12±0.06)mm、(0.13±0.05)mm,显著大于组2的(0.05±0.05)mm、(0.05±0.05)mm和组3的(0.05±0.04)mm、(0.06±0.05)mm(P <0.05);在距根尖孔10 mm处,组4的偏移程度为(0.13±0.06)mm,显著大于组2的(0.06±0.06)mm(P <0.05)。结论 F6 SkyTaper相对于Reciproc的中心定位能力更好,可以在根管预备过程中更好的保持树脂弯曲根管的原始形态。
Objective To compare the shaping ability of 3 different nickel (Ni)-titanium (Ti) systems in simulated root canals in resin and to provide a reference for clinicians.Methods Forty-eight resin blocks were prepared using the F360 (Komet, Brasseler GmbH & Co., Lemgo, Germany) (Group 1), F6 SkyTaper (20/06) (Komet, Brasseler GmbH & Co., Lemgo, Germany) (Group 2), F6 SkyTaper (25/06) (Komet, Brasseler GmbH & Co., Lemgo, Germany) (Group 3) and Reciproc R25 systems (VDW, Munich, Germany) (Group 4) (n=12 canals/group). The images taken before and after preparation were superimposed and analyzed by Adobe Photoshop v7.0. The amount of resin removed by each system was measured, and the centering ability was assessed. The data were statistically analyzed using SPSS 20.0.Results At the 1 mm point, the transportation in Group 4 [ (0.10 ± 0.03) mm] was significantly greater than that in Groups 2[ (0.05 ± 0.03) mm] and 3 [ (0.05 ± 0.03) mm] (P < 0.05). At the 8 mm and 9 mm points, the transportation values in Group 4 [ (0.12 ± 0.06) mm and (0.13 ± 0.05) mm] were significantly higher than those in Groups 2 [ (0.05 ± 0.05) mm and (0.05 ± 0.05) mm] and 3 [ (0.05 ± 0.04) mm and (0.06 ± 0.05) mm] (P < 0.05). At the 10 mm point, the transporta-tion was significantly greater in Group 4 [ (0.13 ± 0.06) mm] than in Group 2 [ (0.06 ± 0.06) mm].Conclusion F6 SkyTaper exhibits better centering ability than Reciproc.
Objective To compare the shaping ability of 3 different nickel (Ni)-titanium (Ti) systems in simulated root canals in resin and to provide a reference for clinicians.Methods Forty-eight resin blocks were prepared using the F360 (Komet, Brasseler GmbH & Co., Lemgo, Germany) (Group 1), F6 SkyTaper (20/06) (Komet, Brasseler GmbH & Co., Lemgo, Germany) (Group 2), F6 SkyTaper (25/06) (Komet, Brasseler GmbH & Co., Lemgo, Germany) (Group 3) and Reciproc R25 systems (VDW, Munich, Germany) (Group 4) (n=12 canals/group). The images taken before and after preparation were superimposed and analyzed by Adobe Photoshop v7.0. The amount of resin removed by each system was measured, and the centering ability was assessed. The data were statistically analyzed using SPSS 20.0.Results At the 1 mm point, the transportation in Group 4 [ (0.10 ± 0.03) mm] was significantly greater than that in Groups 2[ (0.05 ± 0.03) mm] and 3 [ (0.05 ± 0.03) mm] (P < 0.05). At the 8 mm and 9 mm points, the transportation values in Group 4 [ (0.12 ± 0.06) mm and (0.13 ± 0.05) mm] were significantly higher than those in Groups 2 [ (0.05 ± 0.05) mm and (0.05 ± 0.05) mm] and 3 [ (0.05 ± 0.04) mm and (0.06 ± 0.05) mm] (P < 0.05). At the 10 mm point, the transporta-tion was significantly greater in Group 4 [ (0.13 ± 0.06) mm] than in Group 2 [ (0.06 ± 0.06) mm].Conclusion F6 SkyTaper exhibits better centering ability than Reciproc.
引文
[1]Yared G.Canal preparation using only one Ni-Ti rotary instrument:preliminary observations[J].Int Endod J,2008,41(4):339-344.
[2]Poggio C,Dagna A,Chiesa M,et al.Effects of NiTi rotary and reciprocating instruments on debris and smear layer scores:an SEMevaluation[J].J Appl Biomater Funct Mater,2014,12(3):256-262.
[3]Marceliano-Alves MF,Sousa-Neto MD,Fidel SR,et al.Shaping ability of single-file reciprocating and heat-treated multifile rotary systems:a micro-CT study[J].Int Endod J,2015,48(12):1129-1136.
[4]?zyürek T,Y?lmaz K,Uslu G.Shaping ability of reciproc,WaveO-ne GOLD,and HyFlex EDM single-file systems in simulated sshaped canals[J].J Endod,2017,43(5):805.
[5]Kim HC,Kwak SW,Cheung GS,et al.Cyclic fatigue and torsional resistance of two new Nickel-Titanium instruments used in reciprocation motion:reciproc versus WaveOne[J].J Endod,2012,38(4):541-544.
[6]Jakupovic S,Konjhodzic A,Brankovic LH,et al.Canal aberration assessment in simulated root canals:a comparative study[J].Med Arch,2017,71(3):204-207.
[7]邵彤菲,侯晓玫,侯本祥.往复运动镍钛锉根管预备成形能力的体外研究[J].华西口腔医学杂志,2014(6):606-610.
[8]PedullàE,Grande NM,Plotino G,et al.Influence of continuous or reciprocating motion on cyclic fatigue resistance of 4 different Nickel-Titanium rotary instruments[J].J Endod,2013,39(2):258-261.
[9]Wei Z,Cui Z,Yan P,et al.A comparison of the shaping ability of three nickel-titanium rotary instruments:a micro-computed tomography study via a contrast radiopaque technique in vitro[J].Bmc Oral Health,2017,17(1):39.
[10]Saber S,Nagy MM,Schaefer E.Comparative evaluation of the shaping ability of WaveOne,Reciproc and OneShape single-file systems in severely curved root canals of extracted teeth[J].Int Endod J,2015,48(1):109-114.
[11]Altunbas D,Kutuk B,Kustarci A.Shaping ability of reciprocating single-file and full-sequence rotary instrumentation systems in simulated curved canals[J].Eur J Dent,2015,9(3):346-351.
[12]Marcelia Noalves MF,Sousa Neto MD,Fidel SR,et al.Shaping ability of single-file reciprocating and heat-treated multi-file rotary systems:a micro-CT study[J].Int Endod J,2015,48(12):1129-1136.
[13]Wu H,Peng C,Bai Y,et al.Shaping ability of ProTaper universal,WaveOne and ProTaper next in simulated L-shaped and S-shaped root canals[J].BMC Oral Health,2015,15(1):1-7.
[14]Gergi R,Osta N,Bourbouze G,et al.Effects of three Nickel Titanium instrument systems on root canal geometry assessed by microcomputed tomography[J].Int Endod J,2015,48(2):162-170.
[15]Capar ID,Ertas H,Ok E,et al.Comparative study of different novel nickel-titanium rotary systems for root canal preparation in severely curved root canals[J].J Endod,2014,40(6):852-856.
[16]Giansiracusa Rubini A,Plotino G,Al-Sudani D,et al.A new device to test cutting efficiency of mechanical endodontic instruments[J].Med Sci Monit,2014,20(1):374-378.
[17]Gergi R,Arbab-Chirani R,Osta N,et al.Micro-computed tomographic evaluation of canal transportation instrumented by different kinematics rotary nickel-titanium instruments[J].J Endod,2014,40(8):1223-1227.
[18]Nazari Moghadam K,Shahab S,Rostami G.Canal transportation and centering ability of twisted file and reciproc:a cone-beam computed tomography assessment[J].Iran Endod J,2014,9(3):174-179.
[2]Poggio C,Dagna A,Chiesa M,et al.Effects of NiTi rotary and reciprocating instruments on debris and smear layer scores:an SEMevaluation[J].J Appl Biomater Funct Mater,2014,12(3):256-262.
[3]Marceliano-Alves MF,Sousa-Neto MD,Fidel SR,et al.Shaping ability of single-file reciprocating and heat-treated multifile rotary systems:a micro-CT study[J].Int Endod J,2015,48(12):1129-1136.
[4]?zyürek T,Y?lmaz K,Uslu G.Shaping ability of reciproc,WaveO-ne GOLD,and HyFlex EDM single-file systems in simulated sshaped canals[J].J Endod,2017,43(5):805.
[5]Kim HC,Kwak SW,Cheung GS,et al.Cyclic fatigue and torsional resistance of two new Nickel-Titanium instruments used in reciprocation motion:reciproc versus WaveOne[J].J Endod,2012,38(4):541-544.
[6]Jakupovic S,Konjhodzic A,Brankovic LH,et al.Canal aberration assessment in simulated root canals:a comparative study[J].Med Arch,2017,71(3):204-207.
[7]邵彤菲,侯晓玫,侯本祥.往复运动镍钛锉根管预备成形能力的体外研究[J].华西口腔医学杂志,2014(6):606-610.
[8]PedullàE,Grande NM,Plotino G,et al.Influence of continuous or reciprocating motion on cyclic fatigue resistance of 4 different Nickel-Titanium rotary instruments[J].J Endod,2013,39(2):258-261.
[9]Wei Z,Cui Z,Yan P,et al.A comparison of the shaping ability of three nickel-titanium rotary instruments:a micro-computed tomography study via a contrast radiopaque technique in vitro[J].Bmc Oral Health,2017,17(1):39.
[10]Saber S,Nagy MM,Schaefer E.Comparative evaluation of the shaping ability of WaveOne,Reciproc and OneShape single-file systems in severely curved root canals of extracted teeth[J].Int Endod J,2015,48(1):109-114.
[11]Altunbas D,Kutuk B,Kustarci A.Shaping ability of reciprocating single-file and full-sequence rotary instrumentation systems in simulated curved canals[J].Eur J Dent,2015,9(3):346-351.
[12]Marcelia Noalves MF,Sousa Neto MD,Fidel SR,et al.Shaping ability of single-file reciprocating and heat-treated multi-file rotary systems:a micro-CT study[J].Int Endod J,2015,48(12):1129-1136.
[13]Wu H,Peng C,Bai Y,et al.Shaping ability of ProTaper universal,WaveOne and ProTaper next in simulated L-shaped and S-shaped root canals[J].BMC Oral Health,2015,15(1):1-7.
[14]Gergi R,Osta N,Bourbouze G,et al.Effects of three Nickel Titanium instrument systems on root canal geometry assessed by microcomputed tomography[J].Int Endod J,2015,48(2):162-170.
[15]Capar ID,Ertas H,Ok E,et al.Comparative study of different novel nickel-titanium rotary systems for root canal preparation in severely curved root canals[J].J Endod,2014,40(6):852-856.
[16]Giansiracusa Rubini A,Plotino G,Al-Sudani D,et al.A new device to test cutting efficiency of mechanical endodontic instruments[J].Med Sci Monit,2014,20(1):374-378.
[17]Gergi R,Arbab-Chirani R,Osta N,et al.Micro-computed tomographic evaluation of canal transportation instrumented by different kinematics rotary nickel-titanium instruments[J].J Endod,2014,40(8):1223-1227.
[18]Nazari Moghadam K,Shahab S,Rostami G.Canal transportation and centering ability of twisted file and reciproc:a cone-beam computed tomography assessment[J].Iran Endod J,2014,9(3):174-179.