Minerva stomatologica · 2013
In-vitro comparison of instrumentation time and cleaning capacity between endodontic handpiece and manual preparation techniques in primary molar teeth.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Seraj B, Ramezani G, Ghadimi S, Mosharrafian S H, Motahhary P, Safari M
Аннотация
AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the cleaning ability and instrumentation time of manual method and use of endodontic handpiece for preparation of primary molar teeth.
METHODS: Forty primary teeth canals were used in this experimental study. Access cavities were prepared and India ink was injected into the canals. The samples were divided into three groups according to the preparation technique. In the first group the root canals were manually instrumented by k_files. Endodontic handpiece (TEP-ER10, NSK, Japan) were used for canal preparation in the second group and the samples in the third group (control) were not instrumented. After preparing the canal, the teeth were cleared with methyl salicylate and the removal of India ink was measured in the cervical, middle and apical thirds. The instrumentation time was transcribed by chronometer. Statistical analysis was performed using Mann-Whitney and t-test.
RESULTS: There was no significant difference in cleaning capacity between the two techniques, but results of the first and second group differ from those of the control group. In fact, time taken for preparation was significantly shorter with endodontic handpiece system.
CONCLUSION: Seen the shorter working time of endodontic handpiece and the similar cleaning ability of the two techniques, the application of the endodontic handpiece is recommended for preparation of deciduous root canals during pulpectomy.
METHODS: Forty primary teeth canals were used in this experimental study. Access cavities were prepared and India ink was injected into the canals. The samples were divided into three groups according to the preparation technique. In the first group the root canals were manually instrumented by k_files. Endodontic handpiece (TEP-ER10, NSK, Japan) were used for canal preparation in the second group and the samples in the third group (control) were not instrumented. After preparing the canal, the teeth were cleared with methyl salicylate and the removal of India ink was measured in the cervical, middle and apical thirds. The instrumentation time was transcribed by chronometer. Statistical analysis was performed using Mann-Whitney and t-test.
RESULTS: There was no significant difference in cleaning capacity between the two techniques, but results of the first and second group differ from those of the control group. In fact, time taken for preparation was significantly shorter with endodontic handpiece system.
CONCLUSION: Seen the shorter working time of endodontic handpiece and the similar cleaning ability of the two techniques, the application of the endodontic handpiece is recommended for preparation of deciduous root canals during pulpectomy.