Micro-CT assessment of two different endodontic preparation systems

dc.contributorUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
dc.creatorde Moura-Netto, Cacio
dc.creatorPalo, Renato Miotto
dc.creatorCamargo, Carlos Henrique Ribeiro
dc.creatorPameijer, Cornelis Hans
dc.creatorda Silva Bardauil, Marcia Regina Ramalho
dc.date2014-05-27T11:27:31Z
dc.date2016-10-25T18:41:36Z
dc.date2014-05-27T11:27:31Z
dc.date2016-10-25T18:41:36Z
dc.date2013-01-01
dc.date.accessioned2017-04-06T02:08:06Z
dc.date.available2017-04-06T02:08:06Z
dc.identifierBrazilian Oral Research, v. 27, n. 1, p. 26-30, 2013.
dc.identifier1806-8324
dc.identifier1807-3107
dc.identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/74274
dc.identifierhttp://acervodigital.unesp.br/handle/11449/74274
dc.identifier10.1590/S1806-83242012005000029
dc.identifierS1806-83242012005000029
dc.identifierWOS:000314389600005
dc.identifier2-s2.0-84875000393.pdf
dc.identifier2-s2.0-84875000393
dc.identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1806-83242012005000029
dc.identifier.urihttp://repositorioslatinoamericanos.uchile.cl/handle/2250/895042
dc.descriptionThe aim of this study was to compare two endodontic preparation systems using micro-CT analysis. Twenty-four one-rooted mandibular premolars were selected and randomly assigned to two groups. The samples (n = 12) of Group 1 were prepared using the ProTaper Universal rotary system, while Group 2 (n = 12) was prepared using the EndoEZE AET system complemented by manual apical preparation with K-type hand files up to #30. A 2.5% sodium hypochlorite solution was used in both groups for irrigating. Both groups were scanned by highresolution microcomputed tomography before and after preparation (SkyScan 1172, SkyScan, Kontich, Belgium). The root canal volume and surface area was measured before and after preparation, and the differences were calculated and analyzed for statistically significant differences using ANOVA complemented by the Tukey test (p < 0.05). The results showed no statistically significant differences between the mean volumes of dentin removal by the two systems. However, the EndoEZE AET system presented a significantly greater mean surface area compared to the ProTaper system (p < 0.05). The EndoEZE AET system enabled preparation of a greater root canal surface area when compared to the ProTaper Universal system. There seemed to be no difference in dentin volume loss between the two systems used.
dc.languageeng
dc.relationBrazilian Oral Research
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.subjectDental pulp cavity
dc.subjectEndodontics
dc.subjectRoot canal therapy
dc.subjectdental alloy
dc.subjectnickel
dc.subjectstainless steel
dc.subjecttitanium
dc.subjecttitanium nickelide
dc.subjectchemistry
dc.subjectcomparative study
dc.subjectdental equipment
dc.subjectdentin
dc.subjectendodontics
dc.subjectequipment design
dc.subjecthuman
dc.subjectinstrumentation
dc.subjectmethodology
dc.subjectmicro-computed tomography
dc.subjectnonparametric test
dc.subjectradiography
dc.subjectrandomization
dc.subjectreproducibility
dc.subjectsurface property
dc.subjecttooth pulp
dc.subjectDental Alloys
dc.subjectDental Instruments
dc.subjectDental Pulp Cavity
dc.subjectDentin
dc.subjectEquipment Design
dc.subjectHumans
dc.subjectNickel
dc.subjectRandom Allocation
dc.subjectReproducibility of Results
dc.subjectRoot Canal Preparation
dc.subjectStainless Steel
dc.subjectStatistics, Nonparametric
dc.subjectSurface Properties
dc.subjectTitanium
dc.subjectX-Ray Microtomography
dc.titleMicro-CT assessment of two different endodontic preparation systems
dc.typeOtro


Este ítem pertenece a la siguiente institución