Cargando…

Evaluation of Root-End Preparation with Two Different Endodontic Microsurgery Ultrasonic Tips

The aim of this study is to compare root-end preparation performed with two different ultrasonic tips—CVDentus and NSK—and respective time requirements. After root-end resection, 32 teeth were randomly divided in two groups, according to the ultrasonic tip used for root-end preparation. Preparation...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Palma, Paulo J., Marques, Joana A., Casau, Margarida, Santos, André, Caramelo, Francisco, Falacho, Rui I., Santos, João Miguel
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7601836/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32998221
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines8100383
_version_ 1783603527216529408
author Palma, Paulo J.
Marques, Joana A.
Casau, Margarida
Santos, André
Caramelo, Francisco
Falacho, Rui I.
Santos, João Miguel
author_facet Palma, Paulo J.
Marques, Joana A.
Casau, Margarida
Santos, André
Caramelo, Francisco
Falacho, Rui I.
Santos, João Miguel
author_sort Palma, Paulo J.
collection PubMed
description The aim of this study is to compare root-end preparation performed with two different ultrasonic tips—CVDentus and NSK—and respective time requirements. After root-end resection, 32 teeth were randomly divided in two groups, according to the ultrasonic tip used for root-end preparation. Preparation time was recorded. Photomicrographs were taken to assess the following parameters: root surface microcracking, marginal integrity and presence of debris. One ultrasonic tip from each group was analyzed through scanning electron microscopy before and after root-end preparation. The significance level was set at α = 0.05. Incidence of microcracks in both groups was 12.5%. Solely intracanal microcracking was found, consistently positioned within the widest side of the remaining dentine. No statistically significant differences were verified between both experimental groups regarding marginal integrity (p = 0.102) and preparation time (p = 0.780), whereas statistical differences (p = 0.003) were found concerning the presence of debris (the minimum registered score was mostly verified in CVDentus group). NSK tips showed major morphological changes, with extensive surface wear and noticeable loss of particles, which was not verified on CVDentus tips. Our findings suggest significant differences regarding root-end preparation walls quality, with CVDentus tips showing better results. Concerning microcracking, as well as preparation time and marginal integrity, both ultrasonic tips showed similar results. Qualitative analysis exposed NSK tips major morphological changes and wear after use, which was not verified on CVDentus tips.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7601836
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-76018362020-11-01 Evaluation of Root-End Preparation with Two Different Endodontic Microsurgery Ultrasonic Tips Palma, Paulo J. Marques, Joana A. Casau, Margarida Santos, André Caramelo, Francisco Falacho, Rui I. Santos, João Miguel Biomedicines Article The aim of this study is to compare root-end preparation performed with two different ultrasonic tips—CVDentus and NSK—and respective time requirements. After root-end resection, 32 teeth were randomly divided in two groups, according to the ultrasonic tip used for root-end preparation. Preparation time was recorded. Photomicrographs were taken to assess the following parameters: root surface microcracking, marginal integrity and presence of debris. One ultrasonic tip from each group was analyzed through scanning electron microscopy before and after root-end preparation. The significance level was set at α = 0.05. Incidence of microcracks in both groups was 12.5%. Solely intracanal microcracking was found, consistently positioned within the widest side of the remaining dentine. No statistically significant differences were verified between both experimental groups regarding marginal integrity (p = 0.102) and preparation time (p = 0.780), whereas statistical differences (p = 0.003) were found concerning the presence of debris (the minimum registered score was mostly verified in CVDentus group). NSK tips showed major morphological changes, with extensive surface wear and noticeable loss of particles, which was not verified on CVDentus tips. Our findings suggest significant differences regarding root-end preparation walls quality, with CVDentus tips showing better results. Concerning microcracking, as well as preparation time and marginal integrity, both ultrasonic tips showed similar results. Qualitative analysis exposed NSK tips major morphological changes and wear after use, which was not verified on CVDentus tips. MDPI 2020-09-28 /pmc/articles/PMC7601836/ /pubmed/32998221 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines8100383 Text en © 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Palma, Paulo J.
Marques, Joana A.
Casau, Margarida
Santos, André
Caramelo, Francisco
Falacho, Rui I.
Santos, João Miguel
Evaluation of Root-End Preparation with Two Different Endodontic Microsurgery Ultrasonic Tips
title Evaluation of Root-End Preparation with Two Different Endodontic Microsurgery Ultrasonic Tips
title_full Evaluation of Root-End Preparation with Two Different Endodontic Microsurgery Ultrasonic Tips
title_fullStr Evaluation of Root-End Preparation with Two Different Endodontic Microsurgery Ultrasonic Tips
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of Root-End Preparation with Two Different Endodontic Microsurgery Ultrasonic Tips
title_short Evaluation of Root-End Preparation with Two Different Endodontic Microsurgery Ultrasonic Tips
title_sort evaluation of root-end preparation with two different endodontic microsurgery ultrasonic tips
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7601836/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32998221
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines8100383
work_keys_str_mv AT palmapauloj evaluationofrootendpreparationwithtwodifferentendodonticmicrosurgeryultrasonictips
AT marquesjoanaa evaluationofrootendpreparationwithtwodifferentendodonticmicrosurgeryultrasonictips
AT casaumargarida evaluationofrootendpreparationwithtwodifferentendodonticmicrosurgeryultrasonictips
AT santosandre evaluationofrootendpreparationwithtwodifferentendodonticmicrosurgeryultrasonictips
AT caramelofrancisco evaluationofrootendpreparationwithtwodifferentendodonticmicrosurgeryultrasonictips
AT falachoruii evaluationofrootendpreparationwithtwodifferentendodonticmicrosurgeryultrasonictips
AT santosjoaomiguel evaluationofrootendpreparationwithtwodifferentendodonticmicrosurgeryultrasonictips