期刊文献+

Quantitative Comparison of Calcium Hydroxide Removal by EndoActivator, Ultrasonic and ProTaper File Agitation Techniques: An in vitro Study 被引量:4

Quantitative Comparison of Calcium Hydroxide Removal by EndoActivator, Ultrasonic and ProTaper File Agitation Techniques: An in vitro Study
下载PDF
导出
摘要 Calcium hydroxide (CH) dressing residues can compromise endodontic sealing. This study aimed to evaluate the amount of remaining CH in root canals after mechanical removal by four groups of irrigation techniques including needle irrigation only, ProTaper file, EndoActivator, and ultrasonic file. Fifteen extracted single-rooted teeth were collected and used for all four groups. The samples were firstly prepared by ProTaper rotary instruments, and then sectioned longitudinally through the long axis of the root canals, followed by final reassembling by wires. CH was kept in the canals for 7 days setting. The removal procedure began with 5 mL of 2.5% sodium hypochlorite (NaOC1) followed by 1 mL of 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid and a final irrigation with 5 mL of 2.5% NaOC1 solution for all groups. No additional agitation of the irrigant was performed in group 1, while agitation for 20 s be- tween irrigants was done with F2 ProTaper rotary file in group 2, EndoActivator with tip size 25/.04 in group 3 and by an ultrasonic file 25/.02 in group 4. The total activation time was 60 s. The roots were then disassembled and captured by digital camera. The ratio of CH coated surface area to the surface area of the whole canal as well as each third of the canal was calculated. The data were statistically ana- lyzed by one-way ANOVA using post hoc Tukey test. Results showed that none of the four techniques could remove all CH. No significant difference was found between EndoActivator and ultrasonic tech- niques. However, they both removed significantly more CH than ProTaper and needle irrigation (P=0.0001). In conclusion, the sonic and ultrasonic agitation techniques were more effective in removing intracanal medicaments than the ProTaper rotary file and needle irrigation in all thirds of the canal. Calcium hydroxide (CH) dressing residues can compromise endodontic sealing. This study aimed to evaluate the amount of remaining CH in root canals after mechanical removal by four groups of irrigation techniques including needle irrigation only, ProTaper file, EndoActivator, and ultrasonic file. Fifteen extracted single-rooted teeth were collected and used for all four groups. The samples were firstly prepared by ProTaper rotary instruments, and then sectioned longitudinally through the long axis of the root canals, followed by final reassembling by wires. CH was kept in the canals for 7 days setting. The removal procedure began with 5 mL of 2.5% sodium hypochlorite (NaOC1) followed by 1 mL of 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid and a final irrigation with 5 mL of 2.5% NaOC1 solution for all groups. No additional agitation of the irrigant was performed in group 1, while agitation for 20 s be- tween irrigants was done with F2 ProTaper rotary file in group 2, EndoActivator with tip size 25/.04 in group 3 and by an ultrasonic file 25/.02 in group 4. The total activation time was 60 s. The roots were then disassembled and captured by digital camera. The ratio of CH coated surface area to the surface area of the whole canal as well as each third of the canal was calculated. The data were statistically ana- lyzed by one-way ANOVA using post hoc Tukey test. Results showed that none of the four techniques could remove all CH. No significant difference was found between EndoActivator and ultrasonic tech- niques. However, they both removed significantly more CH than ProTaper and needle irrigation (P=0.0001). In conclusion, the sonic and ultrasonic agitation techniques were more effective in removing intracanal medicaments than the ProTaper rotary file and needle irrigation in all thirds of the canal.
出处 《Journal of Huazhong University of Science and Technology(Medical Sciences)》 SCIE CAS 2013年第1期142-145,共4页 华中科技大学学报(医学英德文版)
关键词 calcium hydroxide removal IRRIGATION PROTAPER EndoActivator ULTRASONIC calcium hydroxide removal irrigation ProTaper EndoActivator ultrasonic
  • 相关文献

参考文献26

  • 1Weine FS. Endodontic therapy[M].Elsevier:Mosby,2004.226-228.
  • 2Fava LR,Saunders WP. Calcium hydroxide pastes:classification and clinical indications[J].International Endodontic Journal,1999,(04):257-282.
  • 3Lee M,Winkler J,Hartwell G. Current trends in endodontic practice:emergency treatments and technological armamentarium[J].Journal of Endodontics,2009,(01):35-39.doi:10.1016/j.joen.2008.10.007.
  • 4Sj(o)gren U,Figdor D,Sp(a)ngberg L. The antimicrobial effect of calcium hydroxide as a short-term intracanal dressing[J].International Endodontic Journal,1991,(03):119-125.
  • 5Estrela C,Bammarn LL,Sydney GB. Efeito antibacteriano de pastas de hidróxido de cálcio sobre bactérias aeróbias facultativas[J].Rev Fac Odontol Bauru,1995.33-38.
  • 6Hasselgren G,Olsson B,Cvek M. Effects of calcium hydroxide and sodium hypochlorite on the dissolution of necrotic porcine muscle tissue[J].Journal of Endodontics,1988,(03):125-127.
  • 7Kim SK,Kim YO. Influence of calcium hydroxide intracanal medication on apical seal[J].International Endodontic Journal,2002,(07):623-628.
  • 8Margelos J,Eliades G,Verdelis C. Interaction of calcium hydroxide with zinc oxide-eugenol type sealers:apotential clinical problem[J].Journal of Endodontics,1997,(01):43-48.doi:10.1016/S0099-2399(97)80206-3.
  • 9Calt S,Serper A. Dentinal tubule penetration of root canal sealers after root canal dressing with CaOH[J].Journal of Endodontics,1999,(06):431-433.
  • 10Balvedi RPA,Versiani MA,Manna FF. A comparison of two techniques for the removal of calcium hydroxide from root canals[J].International Endodontic Journal,2010,(09):763-768.

同被引文献4

引证文献4

二级引证文献8

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部