Journal of endodontics · 1994
Intracanal isolating barriers as they relate to bleaching.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Brighton D M, Harrington G W, Nicholls J I
Аннотация
Four restorative materials were evaluated for effectiveness as intracanal isolating barriers to prevent leakage of bleaching agents into the coronal part of the root canal. Fifty-five teeth were stained in vitro, instrumented, and filled with gutta-percha. In the experimental groups, gutta-percha was removed 2 mm apical to the labial cementoenamel junction, and an intracanal isolating barrier (zinc oxide-eugenol, IRM, Ketac-Cem, or Scotchbond Multipurpose) was placed even with the facial and proximal cementoenamel junction areas in a sloped manner. All were bleached with a thermocatalytic and walking bleach technique until the crown was one shade lighter than the original shade. The roots were then examined for the occurrence of bleaching. The results indicate that none of the materials used was a totally effective intracanal isolating barrier. Although a significant difference was found when IRM was compared with Ketac-Cem or Scotchbond Multipurpose (p < 0.05), all restorative materials evaluated showed a high incidence of leakage as demonstrated by bleached roots. There was no significant difference between zinc oxide-eugenol and IRM.