首页> 外文期刊>International endodontic journal >Evaluation of cleaning capacity and instrumentation time of manual, hybrid and rotary instrumentation techniques in primary molars
【24h】

Evaluation of cleaning capacity and instrumentation time of manual, hybrid and rotary instrumentation techniques in primary molars

机译:评估人工磨牙,手动磨牙和旋转磨牙技术的清洁能力和仪器时间

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Pinheiro SL, Araujo G, Bincelli I, Cunha R, Bueno C. Evaluation of cleaning capacity and instrumentation time of manual, hybrid and rotary instrumentation techniques in primary molars. International Endodontic Journal, 45, 379-385, 2012. Aim To compare the cleaning effectiveness of manual, hybrid and rotary instrumentation techniques in primary molar teeth. Methodology Fifteen primary molars were selected. After endodontic access, the teeth were immersed in a medium containing Enterococcusfaecalis and divided into three groups, according to the root canal instrumentation technique: group 1 - manual, group 2 - hybrid and group 3 - nickel-titanium (NiTi) rotary files. For microbiological evaluation, comparisons before and after instrumentation were performed using the paired Student's t-test. One-way anova complemented with the Student's t-test was used to compare the percentage of microbial reduction. Instrumentation time was evaluated by Kruskal-Wallis and Student-Newman-Keuls tests. Images obtained under scanning electron microscopy were analysed by three blinded examiners, and kappa statistics was used to evaluate calibration among examiners. The most frequent results among examiners were analysed using Kruskal-Wallis and Student-Newman-Keuls tests. Results The hybrid technique required a significantly longer instrumentation time than the manual and rotary techniques (P<0.05). All techniques tested were able to significantly reduce the number of E. faecalis (P<0.05). The hybrid technique was associated with the highest intracanal bacterial reduction, with a statistically significant difference compared with manual instrumentation (P=0.01). Manual instrumentation resulted in the lowest amount of debris and the highest amount of smear layer when compared with the rotary and hybrid techniques (P<0.05). There was no difference between rotary and hybrid instrumentation in the removal of debris and smear layer. Conclusion The use of NiTi rotary files is an option for root canal instrumentation in primary teeth.
机译:Pinheiro SL,Araujo G,Bincelli I,Cunha R,BuenoC。手动磨牙,混合磨牙和旋转磨牙技术的清洁能力和仪器时间的评估。 International Endodontic Journal,45,379-385,2012。目的比较手动,混合和旋转器械技术在乳牙磨牙中的清洁效果。方法学选择了15个主要磨牙。根管治疗后,根管检查技术将牙齿浸入含有粪肠球菌的培养基中,分为三组:第1组-手动,第2组-混合和第3组-镍钛(NiTi)旋转锉。对于微生物学评估,使用配对的Student's t检验进行仪器安装前后的比较。单向方差分析与Student's t检验相辅相成,用于比较微生物减少的百分比。通过Kruskal-Wallis和Student-Newman-Keuls测试评估仪器时间。在扫描电子显微镜下获得的图像由三位盲检查员进行分析,并且使用kappa统计量评估检查员之间的校准。使用Kruskal-Wallis和Student-Newman-Keuls检验分析了考官中最常见的结果。结果混合技术比手动和旋转技术需要更长的仪器时间(P <0.05)。测试的所有技术均能够显着减少粪肠球菌的数量(P <0.05)。混合技术与最大的管内细菌减少相关,与手动器械相比具有统计学上的显着差异(P = 0.01)。与旋转和混合技术相比,手动仪器产生的碎片最少,涂片层的数量最多(P <0.05)。旋转仪器和混合仪器在清除碎屑和污迹层方面没有差异。结论使用NiTi旋转锉是乳齿根管器械的一种选择。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号