Analysis of the quality of root canal preparation and retreatment using different instruments associated or not with different irrigant agitation protocols
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2019 |
Tipo de documento: | Tese |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USP |
Texto Completo: | http://www.teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/25/25147/tde-25112019-160915/ |
Resumo: | Introduction: The objectives were: articles I and II - to evaluate the quality of preparation in curved canals of reciprocating systems and cyclic fatigue of new and used instruments; article III - to evaluate the quality of the preparation, in curved canals, of rotary systems and resistance to torsional and cyclic fatigue ,of the new and used glidePath and final instruments, respectively; article IV - to evaluate the quality in the retreatment of curved canals with different systems and the cyclical fatigue, of new and used instruments; article V - evaluate the efficiency in the removal of filling material with different irrigation protocols. Methodology: articles I, II and III - the following instrumentation systems were used: Reciproc Blue 25.08 and 40.06; WaveOne Gold 25.07 and 35.06; ProDesignR 25.06 and 35.05; BT-Race 10.06, 35.00 and 35.04; Sequence Rotary File 15.04, 25.06 and 35.04; ProDesign Logic 25.01, 25.06, and 35.05. Each system was used on 3 teeth. Article I - the transportation, volume and untouched areas were evaluated. Article II - cyclical fatigue of new and used reciprocating instruments were evaluated. Article III - transport, centralization, volume, torsional fatigue and cyclic fatigue of the rotary systems were evaluated. Article IV - the canals were filled and divided according to the retreatment systems: Reciproc 25.08 and 40.06, Reciproc Blue 25.08 and 40.06, Pro-R 25.08 and 40.06 and ProDesign LogicRT 25.08 and 40.05. One instrument was used per tooth. The remaining filling material was measured, the working time required for the instrument 25 to reach working length and cyclic fatigue. Article V - the following irrigation protocols were applied: Continuous Ultrasonic Irrigation with Irrisafe, Continuous Ultrasonic Irrigation with NiTiSonic, Passive Ultrasonic Irrigation with Irrisafe, Passive Ultrasonic Irrigation with NiTiSonic, Eddy and XP-endoFinisherR. The volume of filling material removal was evaluated. Results: I WaveOne Gold presented greater increase in volume and there was no difference in transport and untouched areas. II ProdesignR presented greater resistance to cyclic fatigue. III - there was no difference in transportation, centralization and volume. Torsional fatigue, Sequence Rotary File and ProDesign Logic showed higher values torque and angular deflection, respectively; in cyclic fatigue ProDesign Logic was more resistant. IV ProDesign LogicRT removed more and faster filling material. In cyclic fatigue, Reciproc Blue and ProDesign LogicRT were more resistant. V - There were no differences among the irrigation protocols. Conclusions: I - all the systems presented good quality in the preparation of the root canal. II - ProDesignR presented greater resistance to cyclic fatigue. III - all the systems presented good quality in the preparation, Sequence Rotary File presented higher torque and ProDesign Logic greater angular deflection and cyclic resistance. IV ProDesign LogicRT removed more remaining filling material and was faster. Reciproc Blue and ProDesign LogicRT had greater cyclic resistance. IV - No protocol completely removed the filling material and there was no difference among them. |
id |
USP_5f6d9b8b1886f2268f6de3076417a513 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:teses.usp.br:tde-25112019-160915 |
network_acronym_str |
USP |
network_name_str |
Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USP |
repository_id_str |
2721 |
spelling |
Analysis of the quality of root canal preparation and retreatment using different instruments associated or not with different irrigant agitation protocolsAnálise da qualidade do preparo e do retratamento de diferentes instrumentos associados ou não a diferentes protocolos de agitação do irriganteCyclic fatigueEndodontiaEndodonticsFadiga cíclicaFadiga torsionalIrrigaçãoIrrigationNiTiNiTiRetratamentoRetreatmentTorsional fatigueIntroduction: The objectives were: articles I and II - to evaluate the quality of preparation in curved canals of reciprocating systems and cyclic fatigue of new and used instruments; article III - to evaluate the quality of the preparation, in curved canals, of rotary systems and resistance to torsional and cyclic fatigue ,of the new and used glidePath and final instruments, respectively; article IV - to evaluate the quality in the retreatment of curved canals with different systems and the cyclical fatigue, of new and used instruments; article V - evaluate the efficiency in the removal of filling material with different irrigation protocols. Methodology: articles I, II and III - the following instrumentation systems were used: Reciproc Blue 25.08 and 40.06; WaveOne Gold 25.07 and 35.06; ProDesignR 25.06 and 35.05; BT-Race 10.06, 35.00 and 35.04; Sequence Rotary File 15.04, 25.06 and 35.04; ProDesign Logic 25.01, 25.06, and 35.05. Each system was used on 3 teeth. Article I - the transportation, volume and untouched areas were evaluated. Article II - cyclical fatigue of new and used reciprocating instruments were evaluated. Article III - transport, centralization, volume, torsional fatigue and cyclic fatigue of the rotary systems were evaluated. Article IV - the canals were filled and divided according to the retreatment systems: Reciproc 25.08 and 40.06, Reciproc Blue 25.08 and 40.06, Pro-R 25.08 and 40.06 and ProDesign LogicRT 25.08 and 40.05. One instrument was used per tooth. The remaining filling material was measured, the working time required for the instrument 25 to reach working length and cyclic fatigue. Article V - the following irrigation protocols were applied: Continuous Ultrasonic Irrigation with Irrisafe, Continuous Ultrasonic Irrigation with NiTiSonic, Passive Ultrasonic Irrigation with Irrisafe, Passive Ultrasonic Irrigation with NiTiSonic, Eddy and XP-endoFinisherR. The volume of filling material removal was evaluated. Results: I WaveOne Gold presented greater increase in volume and there was no difference in transport and untouched areas. II ProdesignR presented greater resistance to cyclic fatigue. III - there was no difference in transportation, centralization and volume. Torsional fatigue, Sequence Rotary File and ProDesign Logic showed higher values torque and angular deflection, respectively; in cyclic fatigue ProDesign Logic was more resistant. IV ProDesign LogicRT removed more and faster filling material. In cyclic fatigue, Reciproc Blue and ProDesign LogicRT were more resistant. V - There were no differences among the irrigation protocols. Conclusions: I - all the systems presented good quality in the preparation of the root canal. II - ProDesignR presented greater resistance to cyclic fatigue. III - all the systems presented good quality in the preparation, Sequence Rotary File presented higher torque and ProDesign Logic greater angular deflection and cyclic resistance. IV ProDesign LogicRT removed more remaining filling material and was faster. Reciproc Blue and ProDesign LogicRT had greater cyclic resistance. IV - No protocol completely removed the filling material and there was no difference among them.Introdução: Os objetivos foram: artigos I e II - avaliar a qualidade do preparo, em canais curvos, de sistemas reciprocantes e a fadiga cíclica, de instrumentos novos e usados; artigo III - avaliar a qualidade do preparo, em canais curvos, de sistemas rotatórios e avaliar a resistência a fadiga torsional e cíclica dos instrumentos de glidePath e de acabamento final, respectivamente, tanto novos como usados; artigo IV - avaliar a qualidade no retratamento de canais curvos e a fadiga cíclica, de instrumentos novos e usados, de diferentes sistemas mecanizados; artigo V - avaliar a eficiência na remoção de material obturador remanescente com diferentes protocolos de irrigação. Metodologia: artigos I, II e III - foram utilizados os seguintes sistemas para instrumentar: Reciproc Blue 25.08 e 40.06; WaveOne Gold 25.07 e 35.06; ProDesignR 25.06 e 35.05; BT-Race 10.06, 35.00 e 35.04; Sequence Rotary File 15.04, 25.06 e 35.04; ProDesign Logic 25.01, 25.06 e 35.05. Cada sistema foi utilizado em 3 dentes. Artigo I - foi avaliado o transporte, volume e áreas não tocadas pelos instrumentos reciprocantes. Artigo II - fadiga cíclica dos instrumentos reciprocantes novos e usados. Artigo III - foi avaliado o transporte, centralização, volume, fadiga torsional e fadiga cíclica dos sistemas rotatórios. Artigo IV - os canais foram obturados e divididos de acordo com os sistemas de retratamento: Reciproc 25.08 e 40.06, Reciproc Blue 25.08 e 40.06, Pro-R 25.08 e 40.06 e ProDesign LogicRT 25.08 e 40.05. Foi utilizado um instrumento por dente. Avaliouse o material obturador remanescente, o tempo necessário para o instrumento 25 atingir o comprimento de trabalho e a fadiga cíclica. Artigo V após o retratamento, foram aplicados os seguintes protocolos de irrigação: Irrigação ultrassônica contínua com Irrisafe, Irrigação ultrassônica contínua com NiTiSonic, Irrigação ultrassônica passiva com Irrisafe, Irrigação ultrassônica passiva com NiTiSonic, Eddy e XP-endoFinisherR. Avaliou-se o volume de material obturador removido. Resultados: I WaveOne Gold apresentou maior aumento no volume e não houve diferença no transporte e áreas não-tocadas. II - ProdesignR apresentou maior resistência a fadiga cíclica. III - não houve diferença no transporte, centralização e volume. Fadiga torsional, Sequence Rotary File e ProDesign Logic tiveram melhores resultados de torque e deflexão angular, respectivamente; na fadiga cíclica ProDesign Logic foi mais resistente. IV ProDesign LogicRT removeu mais e mais rápido o material obturador. Na fadiga cíclica, Reciproc Blue e ProDesign LogicRT foram mais resistentes. V - Não houve diferenças entres os protocolos de irrigação. Conclusões: I - todos os sistemas apresentaram boa qualidade no preparo do canal radicular. II - ProDesignR apresentou maior resistência a fadiga cíclica. III todos os sitemas apresentaram boa qualidade no preparo, Sequence Rotary File apresentou maior torque e ProDesign Logic maior deflexão angular e resitência cíclica. IV ProDesign LogicRT removeu mais material obturador remanescente e foi mais rápido. Reciproc Blue e ProDesign LogicRT tiveram maior resistência cíclica. IV Nenhum protocolo removeu completamente o material obturador e não houve diferença entre eles.Biblioteca Digitais de Teses e Dissertações da USPBramante, Clovis MonteiroDuque, Jussaro Alves2019-07-12info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesisapplication/pdfhttp://www.teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/25/25147/tde-25112019-160915/reponame:Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USPinstname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)instacron:USPLiberar o conteúdo para acesso público.info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesseng2019-11-29T22:44:02Zoai:teses.usp.br:tde-25112019-160915Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertaçõeshttp://www.teses.usp.br/PUBhttp://www.teses.usp.br/cgi-bin/mtd2br.plvirginia@if.usp.br|| atendimento@aguia.usp.br||virginia@if.usp.bropendoar:27212019-11-29T22:44:02Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USP - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Analysis of the quality of root canal preparation and retreatment using different instruments associated or not with different irrigant agitation protocols Análise da qualidade do preparo e do retratamento de diferentes instrumentos associados ou não a diferentes protocolos de agitação do irrigante |
title |
Analysis of the quality of root canal preparation and retreatment using different instruments associated or not with different irrigant agitation protocols |
spellingShingle |
Analysis of the quality of root canal preparation and retreatment using different instruments associated or not with different irrigant agitation protocols Duque, Jussaro Alves Cyclic fatigue Endodontia Endodontics Fadiga cíclica Fadiga torsional Irrigação Irrigation NiTi NiTi Retratamento Retreatment Torsional fatigue |
title_short |
Analysis of the quality of root canal preparation and retreatment using different instruments associated or not with different irrigant agitation protocols |
title_full |
Analysis of the quality of root canal preparation and retreatment using different instruments associated or not with different irrigant agitation protocols |
title_fullStr |
Analysis of the quality of root canal preparation and retreatment using different instruments associated or not with different irrigant agitation protocols |
title_full_unstemmed |
Analysis of the quality of root canal preparation and retreatment using different instruments associated or not with different irrigant agitation protocols |
title_sort |
Analysis of the quality of root canal preparation and retreatment using different instruments associated or not with different irrigant agitation protocols |
author |
Duque, Jussaro Alves |
author_facet |
Duque, Jussaro Alves |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
Bramante, Clovis Monteiro |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Duque, Jussaro Alves |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Cyclic fatigue Endodontia Endodontics Fadiga cíclica Fadiga torsional Irrigação Irrigation NiTi NiTi Retratamento Retreatment Torsional fatigue |
topic |
Cyclic fatigue Endodontia Endodontics Fadiga cíclica Fadiga torsional Irrigação Irrigation NiTi NiTi Retratamento Retreatment Torsional fatigue |
description |
Introduction: The objectives were: articles I and II - to evaluate the quality of preparation in curved canals of reciprocating systems and cyclic fatigue of new and used instruments; article III - to evaluate the quality of the preparation, in curved canals, of rotary systems and resistance to torsional and cyclic fatigue ,of the new and used glidePath and final instruments, respectively; article IV - to evaluate the quality in the retreatment of curved canals with different systems and the cyclical fatigue, of new and used instruments; article V - evaluate the efficiency in the removal of filling material with different irrigation protocols. Methodology: articles I, II and III - the following instrumentation systems were used: Reciproc Blue 25.08 and 40.06; WaveOne Gold 25.07 and 35.06; ProDesignR 25.06 and 35.05; BT-Race 10.06, 35.00 and 35.04; Sequence Rotary File 15.04, 25.06 and 35.04; ProDesign Logic 25.01, 25.06, and 35.05. Each system was used on 3 teeth. Article I - the transportation, volume and untouched areas were evaluated. Article II - cyclical fatigue of new and used reciprocating instruments were evaluated. Article III - transport, centralization, volume, torsional fatigue and cyclic fatigue of the rotary systems were evaluated. Article IV - the canals were filled and divided according to the retreatment systems: Reciproc 25.08 and 40.06, Reciproc Blue 25.08 and 40.06, Pro-R 25.08 and 40.06 and ProDesign LogicRT 25.08 and 40.05. One instrument was used per tooth. The remaining filling material was measured, the working time required for the instrument 25 to reach working length and cyclic fatigue. Article V - the following irrigation protocols were applied: Continuous Ultrasonic Irrigation with Irrisafe, Continuous Ultrasonic Irrigation with NiTiSonic, Passive Ultrasonic Irrigation with Irrisafe, Passive Ultrasonic Irrigation with NiTiSonic, Eddy and XP-endoFinisherR. The volume of filling material removal was evaluated. Results: I WaveOne Gold presented greater increase in volume and there was no difference in transport and untouched areas. II ProdesignR presented greater resistance to cyclic fatigue. III - there was no difference in transportation, centralization and volume. Torsional fatigue, Sequence Rotary File and ProDesign Logic showed higher values torque and angular deflection, respectively; in cyclic fatigue ProDesign Logic was more resistant. IV ProDesign LogicRT removed more and faster filling material. In cyclic fatigue, Reciproc Blue and ProDesign LogicRT were more resistant. V - There were no differences among the irrigation protocols. Conclusions: I - all the systems presented good quality in the preparation of the root canal. II - ProDesignR presented greater resistance to cyclic fatigue. III - all the systems presented good quality in the preparation, Sequence Rotary File presented higher torque and ProDesign Logic greater angular deflection and cyclic resistance. IV ProDesign LogicRT removed more remaining filling material and was faster. Reciproc Blue and ProDesign LogicRT had greater cyclic resistance. IV - No protocol completely removed the filling material and there was no difference among them. |
publishDate |
2019 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2019-07-12 |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesis |
format |
doctoralThesis |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://www.teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/25/25147/tde-25112019-160915/ |
url |
http://www.teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/25/25147/tde-25112019-160915/ |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
|
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Liberar o conteúdo para acesso público. info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Liberar o conteúdo para acesso público. |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.coverage.none.fl_str_mv |
|
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Biblioteca Digitais de Teses e Dissertações da USP |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Biblioteca Digitais de Teses e Dissertações da USP |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USP instname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP) instacron:USP |
instname_str |
Universidade de São Paulo (USP) |
instacron_str |
USP |
institution |
USP |
reponame_str |
Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USP |
collection |
Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USP |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USP - Universidade de São Paulo (USP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
virginia@if.usp.br|| atendimento@aguia.usp.br||virginia@if.usp.br |
_version_ |
1809091082612375552 |