与手动器械相比,使用Reciproc和Reciproc Blue器械和新型不锈钢旋转系统(绅士文件)进行根管预备后的体外根尖挤压碎片和预备时间。

Q4 Dentistry Journal of Dental Research, Dental Clinics, Dental Prospects Pub Date : 2023-01-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-11 DOI:10.34172/joddd.2023.39271
Ahmad Nouroloyouni, Shahriar Shahi, Amin Salem Milani, Sara Noorolouny, Robab Farhang, Aysan Yousefi Azar
{"title":"与手动器械相比,使用Reciproc和Reciproc Blue器械和新型不锈钢旋转系统(绅士文件)进行根管预备后的体外根尖挤压碎片和预备时间。","authors":"Ahmad Nouroloyouni, Shahriar Shahi, Amin Salem Milani, Sara Noorolouny, Robab Farhang, Aysan Yousefi Azar","doi":"10.34172/joddd.2023.39271","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study compared apical extrusion of debris and instrumentation time following root canal instrumentation with Reciproc, Reciproc Blue, and Gentlefile (GF) rotary instruments versus the manual step-back technique.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This in vitro study was conducted on 80 extracted mandibular premolars with mature apices and a root curvature of<10°. The teeth were randomly assigned to 4 groups (n=20), standardized regarding working length, and placed in pre-weighed vials. The root canals were instrumented with Reciproc, Reciproc Blue, and GF systems and the manual step-back technique in the four groups. The vials containing the collected debris were then dried and weighed. The instrumentation time was also recorded for each group. Data were analyzed with one-way ANOVA and post hoc Games-Howell test (α=0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Minimum apical debris extrusion was noted in Reciproc, followed by Reciproc Blue, GF, and manual technique (<i>P</i><0.05). Pairwise comparisons showed significantly lower apical extrusion of debris in the Reciproc compared with GF (<i>P</i>=0.015) and manual instrumentation (<i>P</i>=0.011) groups. The Reciproc system also had the shortest instrumentation time, followed by Reciproc Blue, GF, and manual instrumentation (<i>P</i><0.05). Pairwise comparisons showed significant differences between all the systems (<i>P</i><0.05) except between Reciproc and Reciproc Blue (<i>P</i>>0.05) in this respect.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although all systems caused apical extrusion of debris, manual instrumentation caused maximum extrusion of debris. In contrast, the Reciproc system was superior to others regarding minimal apical extrusion of debris and the shortest instrumentation time.</p>","PeriodicalId":15599,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Dental Research, Dental Clinics, Dental Prospects","volume":"17 3","pages":"136-141"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10676536/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"In vitro apical extrusion of debris and instrumentation time following root canal instrumentation with Reciproc and Reciproc Blue instruments and a novel stainless steel rotary system (Gentlefile) versus manual instrumentation.\",\"authors\":\"Ahmad Nouroloyouni, Shahriar Shahi, Amin Salem Milani, Sara Noorolouny, Robab Farhang, Aysan Yousefi Azar\",\"doi\":\"10.34172/joddd.2023.39271\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study compared apical extrusion of debris and instrumentation time following root canal instrumentation with Reciproc, Reciproc Blue, and Gentlefile (GF) rotary instruments versus the manual step-back technique.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This in vitro study was conducted on 80 extracted mandibular premolars with mature apices and a root curvature of<10°. The teeth were randomly assigned to 4 groups (n=20), standardized regarding working length, and placed in pre-weighed vials. The root canals were instrumented with Reciproc, Reciproc Blue, and GF systems and the manual step-back technique in the four groups. The vials containing the collected debris were then dried and weighed. The instrumentation time was also recorded for each group. Data were analyzed with one-way ANOVA and post hoc Games-Howell test (α=0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Minimum apical debris extrusion was noted in Reciproc, followed by Reciproc Blue, GF, and manual technique (<i>P</i><0.05). Pairwise comparisons showed significantly lower apical extrusion of debris in the Reciproc compared with GF (<i>P</i>=0.015) and manual instrumentation (<i>P</i>=0.011) groups. The Reciproc system also had the shortest instrumentation time, followed by Reciproc Blue, GF, and manual instrumentation (<i>P</i><0.05). Pairwise comparisons showed significant differences between all the systems (<i>P</i><0.05) except between Reciproc and Reciproc Blue (<i>P</i>>0.05) in this respect.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although all systems caused apical extrusion of debris, manual instrumentation caused maximum extrusion of debris. In contrast, the Reciproc system was superior to others regarding minimal apical extrusion of debris and the shortest instrumentation time.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15599,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Dental Research, Dental Clinics, Dental Prospects\",\"volume\":\"17 3\",\"pages\":\"136-141\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10676536/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Dental Research, Dental Clinics, Dental Prospects\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.34172/joddd.2023.39271\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/11/11 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Dentistry\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Dental Research, Dental Clinics, Dental Prospects","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34172/joddd.2023.39271","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:本研究比较了Reciproc、Reciproc Blue和Gentlefile (GF)旋转器械与手动退步技术根管预备后的根尖挤压碎片和预备时间。方法:对80颗拔除的根尖成熟、根部弯曲的下颌前磨牙进行体外研究。结果:Reciproc组的根尖磨损最小,其次是Reciproc Blue组、GF组和手动组(PP=0.015)和手动器械组(P=0.011)。Reciproc系统的仪器时间最短,其次是Reciproc Blue、GF和手动仪器(PPP>0.05)。结论:虽然所有的器械都造成了碎片的根尖挤压,但手工器械对碎片的挤压最大。相比之下,Reciproc系统在最小的根尖挤压碎片和最短的仪器时间方面优于其他系统。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
In vitro apical extrusion of debris and instrumentation time following root canal instrumentation with Reciproc and Reciproc Blue instruments and a novel stainless steel rotary system (Gentlefile) versus manual instrumentation.

Background: This study compared apical extrusion of debris and instrumentation time following root canal instrumentation with Reciproc, Reciproc Blue, and Gentlefile (GF) rotary instruments versus the manual step-back technique.

Methods: This in vitro study was conducted on 80 extracted mandibular premolars with mature apices and a root curvature of<10°. The teeth were randomly assigned to 4 groups (n=20), standardized regarding working length, and placed in pre-weighed vials. The root canals were instrumented with Reciproc, Reciproc Blue, and GF systems and the manual step-back technique in the four groups. The vials containing the collected debris were then dried and weighed. The instrumentation time was also recorded for each group. Data were analyzed with one-way ANOVA and post hoc Games-Howell test (α=0.05).

Results: Minimum apical debris extrusion was noted in Reciproc, followed by Reciproc Blue, GF, and manual technique (P<0.05). Pairwise comparisons showed significantly lower apical extrusion of debris in the Reciproc compared with GF (P=0.015) and manual instrumentation (P=0.011) groups. The Reciproc system also had the shortest instrumentation time, followed by Reciproc Blue, GF, and manual instrumentation (P<0.05). Pairwise comparisons showed significant differences between all the systems (P<0.05) except between Reciproc and Reciproc Blue (P>0.05) in this respect.

Conclusion: Although all systems caused apical extrusion of debris, manual instrumentation caused maximum extrusion of debris. In contrast, the Reciproc system was superior to others regarding minimal apical extrusion of debris and the shortest instrumentation time.

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
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
23
审稿时长
25 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Dental Research Dental Clinics Dental Prospects (JODDD) is a Platinum* Open Access, peer-reviewed quarterly indexed journal that publishes articles of basic, clinical, and prospective nature in all areas of dentistry and oral health.
期刊最新文献
Effect of treatment variables on apical extrusion of debris during root canal retreatment: A systematic review and meta-analysis of laboratory studies. Effects of ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid, citric acid, and etidronic acid on root dentin mineral content and bond strength of a bioceramic-based sealer: A scanning electron microscopy-energy dispersive spectroscopy study. Evaluation of the accuracy of full-arch impressions between three different intraoral scanners and conventional impressions: A prospective in vivo study. Evaluation of the skeletal and dental effects of a hybrid aesthetic functional appliance (HAF) in skeletal class II division 1 malocclusion: A prospective uncontrolled clinical trial. Impact of dental caries on the daily lives of geriatric patients visiting dental hospitals in Rawalpindi, Pakistan.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1