BMC oral health · 2026
Comparison of compaction techniques for filling isthmuses using Biodentine in mandibular molars.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Sarıyılmaz Evren, Sarıyılmaz Öznur, Sessiz Rüya, Uslu Gülşah
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare the filling volume and surface area of Biodentine placed in mandibular molar isthmuses using three different compaction techniques (manual, ultrasonic, and sonic endomotor system).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty resin mandibular molars with simulated apical-third isthmuses were randomly assigned to three compaction groups: manual, ultrasonic, and sonic endomotor system. Biodentine was compacted manually, with indirect ultrasonic activation, or using a sonic endomotor system. All specimens were scanned with high-resolution CBCT, and filling volumes and surface areas were quantified in 3D Slicer. Data were analyzed with one-way ANOVA.
RESULTS: While the sonic endomotor group showed the highest mean filling volume (8.11 ± 0.79 mm³), followed by the ultrasonic (7.93 ± 1.52 mm³) and manual (7.33 ± 0.80 mm³) groups, no statistically significant differences were found among the groups for either filling volume or surface area.
CONCLUSIONS: Under the conditions tested, no statistically significant differences were detected among the three compaction techniques in terms of filling volume or surface area. No superiority of ultrasonic or sonic activation over manual compaction was demonstrated within the resolution limits of this CBCT-based methodology.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty resin mandibular molars with simulated apical-third isthmuses were randomly assigned to three compaction groups: manual, ultrasonic, and sonic endomotor system. Biodentine was compacted manually, with indirect ultrasonic activation, or using a sonic endomotor system. All specimens were scanned with high-resolution CBCT, and filling volumes and surface areas were quantified in 3D Slicer. Data were analyzed with one-way ANOVA.
RESULTS: While the sonic endomotor group showed the highest mean filling volume (8.11 ± 0.79 mm³), followed by the ultrasonic (7.93 ± 1.52 mm³) and manual (7.33 ± 0.80 mm³) groups, no statistically significant differences were found among the groups for either filling volume or surface area.
CONCLUSIONS: Under the conditions tested, no statistically significant differences were detected among the three compaction techniques in terms of filling volume or surface area. No superiority of ultrasonic or sonic activation over manual compaction was demonstrated within the resolution limits of this CBCT-based methodology.