Efficacy of five rotary systems versus manual instrumentation during endodontic retreatment

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Fariniuk,Luiz Fernando
Data de Publicação: 2011
Outros Autores: Westphalen,Vânia Portela Dietzel, Silva-Neto,Ulisses Xavier da, Carneiro,Everdan, Baratto Filho,Flares, Fidel,Sandra Rivera, Fidel,Rivail Antônio Sérgio
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Brazilian Dental Journal
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0103-64402011000400006
Resumo: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficiency of ProFile, GT, ProTaper, Race and K3 rotary instruments compared with hand K-files for removal of gutta-percha during retreatment. Sixty mandibular premolars were instrumented with GT rotary files and filled by thermomechanical compaction of gutta-percha and AH Plus sealer. The teeth are randomly divided into 6 groups of 10 specimens each. The roots were split longitudinally, digital images were created using a flatbed scanner, and the areas with remaining filling material were demarcated using Image Tool 1.21 software. The results indicate that GT left significantly less (p<0.05) remaining filling material (1.18 ± 1.47) than hand (3.70 ± 3.16) and Hero instruments (2.99 ± 2.58). There was no statistically significant difference (p<0.05) among the others techniques: ProFile (1.99 ± 2.66), ProTaper (2.00 ± 1.99) and K3 (2.71 ± 2.87) when compared with GT. In conclusion, GT, ProFile, ProTaper and K3 were more effective in removing gutta-percha than manual and Hero instruments.
id FUNORP-1_4b03a2a41b725236f60b0a13f4a96ba0
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S0103-64402011000400006
network_acronym_str FUNORP-1
network_name_str Brazilian Dental Journal
repository_id_str
spelling Efficacy of five rotary systems versus manual instrumentation during endodontic retreatmentgutta-percha removalnickel-titanium filesroot canal retreatmentrotary instrumentationThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficiency of ProFile, GT, ProTaper, Race and K3 rotary instruments compared with hand K-files for removal of gutta-percha during retreatment. Sixty mandibular premolars were instrumented with GT rotary files and filled by thermomechanical compaction of gutta-percha and AH Plus sealer. The teeth are randomly divided into 6 groups of 10 specimens each. The roots were split longitudinally, digital images were created using a flatbed scanner, and the areas with remaining filling material were demarcated using Image Tool 1.21 software. The results indicate that GT left significantly less (p<0.05) remaining filling material (1.18 ± 1.47) than hand (3.70 ± 3.16) and Hero instruments (2.99 ± 2.58). There was no statistically significant difference (p<0.05) among the others techniques: ProFile (1.99 ± 2.66), ProTaper (2.00 ± 1.99) and K3 (2.71 ± 2.87) when compared with GT. In conclusion, GT, ProFile, ProTaper and K3 were more effective in removing gutta-percha than manual and Hero instruments.Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto2011-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0103-64402011000400006Brazilian Dental Journal v.22 n.4 2011reponame:Brazilian Dental Journalinstname:Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto (FUNORP)instacron:FUNORP10.1590/S0103-64402011000400006info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessFariniuk,Luiz FernandoWestphalen,Vânia Portela DietzelSilva-Neto,Ulisses Xavier daCarneiro,EverdanBaratto Filho,FlaresFidel,Sandra RiveraFidel,Rivail Antônio Sérgioeng2011-08-12T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0103-64402011000400006Revistahttps://www.scielo.br/j/bdj/https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phpbdj@forp.usp.br||sergio@fosjc.unesp.br1806-47600103-6440opendoar:2011-08-12T00:00Brazilian Dental Journal - Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto (FUNORP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Efficacy of five rotary systems versus manual instrumentation during endodontic retreatment
title Efficacy of five rotary systems versus manual instrumentation during endodontic retreatment
spellingShingle Efficacy of five rotary systems versus manual instrumentation during endodontic retreatment
Fariniuk,Luiz Fernando
gutta-percha removal
nickel-titanium files
root canal retreatment
rotary instrumentation
title_short Efficacy of five rotary systems versus manual instrumentation during endodontic retreatment
title_full Efficacy of five rotary systems versus manual instrumentation during endodontic retreatment
title_fullStr Efficacy of five rotary systems versus manual instrumentation during endodontic retreatment
title_full_unstemmed Efficacy of five rotary systems versus manual instrumentation during endodontic retreatment
title_sort Efficacy of five rotary systems versus manual instrumentation during endodontic retreatment
author Fariniuk,Luiz Fernando
author_facet Fariniuk,Luiz Fernando
Westphalen,Vânia Portela Dietzel
Silva-Neto,Ulisses Xavier da
Carneiro,Everdan
Baratto Filho,Flares
Fidel,Sandra Rivera
Fidel,Rivail Antônio Sérgio
author_role author
author2 Westphalen,Vânia Portela Dietzel
Silva-Neto,Ulisses Xavier da
Carneiro,Everdan
Baratto Filho,Flares
Fidel,Sandra Rivera
Fidel,Rivail Antônio Sérgio
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Fariniuk,Luiz Fernando
Westphalen,Vânia Portela Dietzel
Silva-Neto,Ulisses Xavier da
Carneiro,Everdan
Baratto Filho,Flares
Fidel,Sandra Rivera
Fidel,Rivail Antônio Sérgio
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv gutta-percha removal
nickel-titanium files
root canal retreatment
rotary instrumentation
topic gutta-percha removal
nickel-titanium files
root canal retreatment
rotary instrumentation
description The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficiency of ProFile, GT, ProTaper, Race and K3 rotary instruments compared with hand K-files for removal of gutta-percha during retreatment. Sixty mandibular premolars were instrumented with GT rotary files and filled by thermomechanical compaction of gutta-percha and AH Plus sealer. The teeth are randomly divided into 6 groups of 10 specimens each. The roots were split longitudinally, digital images were created using a flatbed scanner, and the areas with remaining filling material were demarcated using Image Tool 1.21 software. The results indicate that GT left significantly less (p<0.05) remaining filling material (1.18 ± 1.47) than hand (3.70 ± 3.16) and Hero instruments (2.99 ± 2.58). There was no statistically significant difference (p<0.05) among the others techniques: ProFile (1.99 ± 2.66), ProTaper (2.00 ± 1.99) and K3 (2.71 ± 2.87) when compared with GT. In conclusion, GT, ProFile, ProTaper and K3 were more effective in removing gutta-percha than manual and Hero instruments.
publishDate 2011
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2011-01-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0103-64402011000400006
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0103-64402011000400006
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/S0103-64402011000400006
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Brazilian Dental Journal v.22 n.4 2011
reponame:Brazilian Dental Journal
instname:Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto (FUNORP)
instacron:FUNORP
instname_str Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto (FUNORP)
instacron_str FUNORP
institution FUNORP
reponame_str Brazilian Dental Journal
collection Brazilian Dental Journal
repository.name.fl_str_mv Brazilian Dental Journal - Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto (FUNORP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv bdj@forp.usp.br||sergio@fosjc.unesp.br
_version_ 1754204091797471232

Registros relacionados