口腔医学研究

口腔医学研究 ›› 2019, Vol. 35 ›› Issue (1): 89-93.DOI: 10.13701/j.cnki.kqyxyj.2019.01.021

• 牙髓病学研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

大锥度通畅通道在模拟弯曲根管中对ProTaper Next成形能力的影响

韩怡1, 付宏宇2, 侯晓玫1*   

  1. 1. 北京大学口腔医院第二门诊部 北京 100101;
    2. 北京大学第一医院口腔科 北京 100034
  • 收稿日期:2018-07-03 出版日期:2019-01-18 发布日期:2019-01-28
  • 通讯作者: 侯晓玫,E-mail: houxiaomei1108@163.com
  • 作者简介:韩怡(1978~ ),女,辽宁大连人,硕士,主治医师,从事镍钛锉的成形能力研究。
  • 基金资助:
    北京大学口腔医院临床新技术新疗法项目(编号:PKUSSNCT-17B12)

Effect of Tapered Glide Path on Shaping Ability of ProTaper Next in Simulated Root Canals

HAN Yi1, FU Hong-yu2, HOU Xiao-mei1*   

  1. 1. The Second Dental Center of Peking University School of Stomatology, Beijing 100101, China;
    2. Department of Stomatology, First Hospital of Peking University, Beijing 100034, China
  • Received:2018-07-03 Online:2019-01-18 Published:2019-01-28

PDF (PC)

219

摘要： 目的:比较ProGlider、HyFlex EDM Glidepath File、RaCe ISO 10、PathFile和手动不锈钢K锉在树脂模拟根管制备的通畅通道对ProTaper Next成形能力的影响。方法:40个模拟根管,随机分为5组,分别制备通畅通道,随后统一用ProTaper Next根备到X2,记录通畅锉和ProTaper Next的操作时间;使用 Photoshop和 ImageJ测量从根尖止点开始,每隔1 mm内外侧壁树脂去除量,计算中心定位能力。结果:HyFlex EDM Glidepath File和RaCe ISO 10制备的通畅通道形态显著降低后续ProTaper Next根备时间。中心定位能力方面,距根尖孔0~2mm处,HyFlex EDM Glidepath File+ProTaper Next最优,不锈钢K锉+ProTaper Next偏移最大。距根尖孔3~6 mm处,HyFlex EDM Glidepath File和RaCe ISO10 +ProTaper Next最优,ProGlider +ProTaper Next的偏移显著增大,超过不锈钢K锉+ProTaper Next的偏移量。结论:通畅通道形态对ProTaper Next根管预备形态有显著影响。根尖偏移小,中上段开敞好的通道,ProTaper Next中心定位能力最优。

关键词: 通畅通道, 成形能力, 模拟根管, ProTaper Next, HyFlex EDM Glidepath File

Abstract: Objective: To compare the effect of glide path by using ProGlider, HyFlex EDM Glidepath File, RaCe ISO 10, PathFile, and stainless steel K file on the shaping ability of ProTaper Next in simulated root canals. Methods: A total of 40 resin blocks were divided randomly into five groups, each prepared with each glide path file. Furthermore, each canal was prepared by using ProTaper Next till X2. Preparation time for ProTaper Next was recorded. Pre- and postoperative images were superimposed and the material removal from the inner and outer canal walls beginning from 0 mm at the end point of the canal were measured using ImageJ. Centering ability of ProTaper Next was determined, accordingly. Results: Preparation times for ProTaper Next after HyFlex EDM Glidepath File and RaCe ISO 10 were significantly shorter than the others. For centering ability, at the apical portion, the transportation of HyFlex EDM Glidepath File+ProTaper Next was the least, while ststainless steeel K file+ProTaper Next was the most. At the curved portion, HyFlex EDM Glidepath File and RaCe ISO10+ProTaper Next were the least, while the transportation of ProGlider+ProTaper Next increased significantly to overwhelm that of stainless steel K file+ProTaper Next. Conclusion: Glide path exhibits significant impact on shaping ability of ProTaper Next in which the less transportation at the apical portion, the larger taper at the coronal portion, the better shaping ability of ProTaper Next.

Key words: Glide path, Shaping ability, Simulated root canals, ProTaper Next, HyFlex EDM Glidepath File