Mario Dioguardi, Davide La Notte, Diego Sovereto, Cristian Quarta, Angelo Martella, Andrea Ballini
{"title":"牙洞设计对抗折性的影响:分析不同的牙髓腔进入技术在发生折裂中的作用:叙述性综述。","authors":"Mario Dioguardi, Davide La Notte, Diego Sovereto, Cristian Quarta, Angelo Martella, Andrea Ballini","doi":"10.1155/2024/1648011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>In recent years, new endodontic access techniques have been proposed with the aim of preserving as much dental tissue as possible for subsequent prosthetic rehabilitation. It has indeed been demonstrated that the success of this therapy is essential and dependent on the proper execution of endodontic cavity access. The main objective is to provide a comprehensive and up-to-date overview of the new access techniques in endodontics in order to guide clinical practice toward a more precise and qualitative approach. As of today, there is still no universally standardized and recognized taxonomy for the different access cavity designs described in the literature. It has been observed that there are various nomenclatures in the literature. The cavity access designs described mainly in the literature can be categorized into six groups: Traditional Access Cavity (TradAC), Conservative Access Cavity (ConsAC), Ultra-Conservative Access Cavity (UltraAC), Truss Access Cavity (TrussAC), Caries-Guided Access Cavity (CariesAC), and Restoration-Guided Access Cavity (RestoAC).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The drafting of this narrative review followed the indications of the SANRA (Scale for the Assessment of Narrative Review Articles). A search for scientific articles was conducted on the PubMed and SCOPUS databases, using the following search query: ((truss) OR (conservative) OR (ninja) OR (traditional)) AND access AND endodontic.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The initial search yielded a total of 941 articles. After removing duplicates using EndNote X8 software, the number of articles decreased to 785. By applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of 64 articles were obtained. Among these, 20 articles were finally selected for the purposes of this review, 11 literature reviews and 9 ex-vivo studies.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Studies on fracture resistance have yielded heterogeneous results. For anterior teeth, studies do not find a significant relationship between different endodontic access cavities and fracture resistance. However, in the posterior sector, there is more discrepancy and many positive results for minimally invasive access cavities seem to relate to molars. Therefore, it can be concluded that the evidence supporting the influence of endodontic preparations on dental fracture resistance is still limited. Research on new endodontic access techniques holds significant clinical relevance in contemporary endodontics. The evolution of dental technologies, including cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and computer-guided cavity preparation, has ushered in the era of minimally invasive endodontics. This shift aims to enhance the precision and quality of endodontic treatments while preserving maximum healthy dental tissue for subsequent prosthetic rehabilitation. The success of endodontic therapy is closely tied to the proper execution of access to the endodontium, influencing all phases of endodontic treatment and playing a role in determining fracture resistance for subsequent rehabilitation phases. The dichotomy between traditional and minimally invasive approaches has spurred clinical investigations. Specifically, within the scientific community, doubts have been raised about the potential limitations of minimally invasive access cavities. Concerns include their impact on canal orifice localization and raise questions about their influence on the overall success of endodontic treatment. This review holds clinical significance as it sheds light on the evolving landscape of endodontic access techniques, analyzing the anatomical trajectory, carefully examines the transition to minimally invasive approaches, and critically assesses existing scientific evidence and concerns surrounding these developments, contributing to an informed decision-making process in clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":22985,"journal":{"name":"The Scientific World Journal","volume":"2024 ","pages":"1648011"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11303043/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Influence of Cavity Designs on Fracture Resistance: Analysis of the Role of Different Access Techniques to the Endodontic Cavity in the Onset of Fractures: Narrative Review.\",\"authors\":\"Mario Dioguardi, Davide La Notte, Diego Sovereto, Cristian Quarta, Angelo Martella, Andrea Ballini\",\"doi\":\"10.1155/2024/1648011\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>In recent years, new endodontic access techniques have been proposed with the aim of preserving as much dental tissue as possible for subsequent prosthetic rehabilitation. It has indeed been demonstrated that the success of this therapy is essential and dependent on the proper execution of endodontic cavity access. The main objective is to provide a comprehensive and up-to-date overview of the new access techniques in endodontics in order to guide clinical practice toward a more precise and qualitative approach. As of today, there is still no universally standardized and recognized taxonomy for the different access cavity designs described in the literature. It has been observed that there are various nomenclatures in the literature. The cavity access designs described mainly in the literature can be categorized into six groups: Traditional Access Cavity (TradAC), Conservative Access Cavity (ConsAC), Ultra-Conservative Access Cavity (UltraAC), Truss Access Cavity (TrussAC), Caries-Guided Access Cavity (CariesAC), and Restoration-Guided Access Cavity (RestoAC).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The drafting of this narrative review followed the indications of the SANRA (Scale for the Assessment of Narrative Review Articles). A search for scientific articles was conducted on the PubMed and SCOPUS databases, using the following search query: ((truss) OR (conservative) OR (ninja) OR (traditional)) AND access AND endodontic.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The initial search yielded a total of 941 articles. After removing duplicates using EndNote X8 software, the number of articles decreased to 785. By applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of 64 articles were obtained. Among these, 20 articles were finally selected for the purposes of this review, 11 literature reviews and 9 ex-vivo studies.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Studies on fracture resistance have yielded heterogeneous results. For anterior teeth, studies do not find a significant relationship between different endodontic access cavities and fracture resistance. However, in the posterior sector, there is more discrepancy and many positive results for minimally invasive access cavities seem to relate to molars. Therefore, it can be concluded that the evidence supporting the influence of endodontic preparations on dental fracture resistance is still limited. Research on new endodontic access techniques holds significant clinical relevance in contemporary endodontics. The evolution of dental technologies, including cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and computer-guided cavity preparation, has ushered in the era of minimally invasive endodontics. This shift aims to enhance the precision and quality of endodontic treatments while preserving maximum healthy dental tissue for subsequent prosthetic rehabilitation. The success of endodontic therapy is closely tied to the proper execution of access to the endodontium, influencing all phases of endodontic treatment and playing a role in determining fracture resistance for subsequent rehabilitation phases. The dichotomy between traditional and minimally invasive approaches has spurred clinical investigations. Specifically, within the scientific community, doubts have been raised about the potential limitations of minimally invasive access cavities. Concerns include their impact on canal orifice localization and raise questions about their influence on the overall success of endodontic treatment. This review holds clinical significance as it sheds light on the evolving landscape of endodontic access techniques, analyzing the anatomical trajectory, carefully examines the transition to minimally invasive approaches, and critically assesses existing scientific evidence and concerns surrounding these developments, contributing to an informed decision-making process in clinical practice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22985,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Scientific World Journal\",\"volume\":\"2024 \",\"pages\":\"1648011\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11303043/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Scientific World Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/1648011\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Environmental Science\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Scientific World Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/1648011","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Environmental Science","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:近年来,人们提出了一些新的根管治疗技术,目的是尽可能多地保留牙体组织,以便进行后续修复。事实证明,这种治疗方法的成功与否取决于牙髓腔通路的正确实施。本书的主要目的是对根管治疗中新的入路技术进行全面和最新的概述,以指导临床实践采用更精确和更高质量的方法。迄今为止,对于文献中描述的不同的通路牙洞设计,仍没有一个统一的标准和公认的分类法。据观察,文献中有各种不同的命名方法。文献中主要描述的腔体接入设计可分为六类:传统就诊洞(TradAC)、保守就诊洞(ConsAC)、超保守就诊洞(UltraAC)、桁架就诊洞(TrussAC)、龋引导就诊洞(CariesAC)和修复引导就诊洞(RestoAC):这篇叙事性综述的起草遵循了 SANRA(叙事性综述文章评估量表)的指示。在 PubMed 和 SCOPUS 数据库中使用以下搜索条件对科学文章进行了检索:((桁架) OR (保守) OR (忍者) OR (传统)) AND access AND endodontic.结果:结果:初步搜索共获得 941 篇文章。使用 EndNote X8 软件去除重复文章后,文章数量减少到 785 篇。根据纳入和排除标准,共获得 64 篇文章。在这些文章中,最终有 20 篇文章被选中用于本综述,其中 11 篇为文献综述,9 篇为体外研究:结论:关于抗折性的研究结果各不相同。对于前牙,研究并未发现不同的牙髓通路洞与抗折断性之间有明显的关系。然而,在后牙方面,差异较大,许多关于微创入路腔的积极结果似乎与磨牙有关。因此,可以得出结论,支持牙髓预备对牙齿抗折性影响的证据仍然有限。对新的牙髓通路技术的研究在当代牙髓病学中具有重要的临床意义。牙科技术的发展,包括锥形束计算机断层扫描(CBCT)和计算机引导的牙洞预备,开创了微创根管治疗的时代。这一转变旨在提高牙髓治疗的精确度和质量,同时最大限度地保留健康的牙体组织,以利于后续的修复治疗。牙髓治疗的成功与否与牙本质的正确进入密切相关,它影响着牙髓治疗的所有阶段,并对后续修复阶段的抗折性起着决定性作用。传统方法和微创方法之间的对立激发了临床研究。特别是在科学界,人们对微创入路洞的潜在局限性提出了质疑。这些疑虑包括它们对根管口定位的影响,以及它们对根管治疗整体成功率的影响。这篇综述具有重要的临床意义,因为它揭示了牙髓治疗通路技术不断发展的前景,分析了解剖学轨迹,仔细研究了向微创方法的过渡,并批判性地评估了现有的科学证据和围绕这些发展的担忧,有助于临床实践中的知情决策过程。
Influence of Cavity Designs on Fracture Resistance: Analysis of the Role of Different Access Techniques to the Endodontic Cavity in the Onset of Fractures: Narrative Review.
Objectives: In recent years, new endodontic access techniques have been proposed with the aim of preserving as much dental tissue as possible for subsequent prosthetic rehabilitation. It has indeed been demonstrated that the success of this therapy is essential and dependent on the proper execution of endodontic cavity access. The main objective is to provide a comprehensive and up-to-date overview of the new access techniques in endodontics in order to guide clinical practice toward a more precise and qualitative approach. As of today, there is still no universally standardized and recognized taxonomy for the different access cavity designs described in the literature. It has been observed that there are various nomenclatures in the literature. The cavity access designs described mainly in the literature can be categorized into six groups: Traditional Access Cavity (TradAC), Conservative Access Cavity (ConsAC), Ultra-Conservative Access Cavity (UltraAC), Truss Access Cavity (TrussAC), Caries-Guided Access Cavity (CariesAC), and Restoration-Guided Access Cavity (RestoAC).
Materials and methods: The drafting of this narrative review followed the indications of the SANRA (Scale for the Assessment of Narrative Review Articles). A search for scientific articles was conducted on the PubMed and SCOPUS databases, using the following search query: ((truss) OR (conservative) OR (ninja) OR (traditional)) AND access AND endodontic.
Results: The initial search yielded a total of 941 articles. After removing duplicates using EndNote X8 software, the number of articles decreased to 785. By applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of 64 articles were obtained. Among these, 20 articles were finally selected for the purposes of this review, 11 literature reviews and 9 ex-vivo studies.
Conclusion: Studies on fracture resistance have yielded heterogeneous results. For anterior teeth, studies do not find a significant relationship between different endodontic access cavities and fracture resistance. However, in the posterior sector, there is more discrepancy and many positive results for minimally invasive access cavities seem to relate to molars. Therefore, it can be concluded that the evidence supporting the influence of endodontic preparations on dental fracture resistance is still limited. Research on new endodontic access techniques holds significant clinical relevance in contemporary endodontics. The evolution of dental technologies, including cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and computer-guided cavity preparation, has ushered in the era of minimally invasive endodontics. This shift aims to enhance the precision and quality of endodontic treatments while preserving maximum healthy dental tissue for subsequent prosthetic rehabilitation. The success of endodontic therapy is closely tied to the proper execution of access to the endodontium, influencing all phases of endodontic treatment and playing a role in determining fracture resistance for subsequent rehabilitation phases. The dichotomy between traditional and minimally invasive approaches has spurred clinical investigations. Specifically, within the scientific community, doubts have been raised about the potential limitations of minimally invasive access cavities. Concerns include their impact on canal orifice localization and raise questions about their influence on the overall success of endodontic treatment. This review holds clinical significance as it sheds light on the evolving landscape of endodontic access techniques, analyzing the anatomical trajectory, carefully examines the transition to minimally invasive approaches, and critically assesses existing scientific evidence and concerns surrounding these developments, contributing to an informed decision-making process in clinical practice.
期刊介绍:
The Scientific World Journal is a peer-reviewed, Open Access journal that publishes original research, reviews, and clinical studies covering a wide range of subjects in science, technology, and medicine. The journal is divided into 81 subject areas.