A comparison of four gutta-percha filling techniques in simulated C-shaped canals
Aim To compare four gutta‐percha filling techniques in simulated C‐shaped canals based on filling quality at three cross‐sectional levels, filling time and the apical extrusion of gutta‐percha. Methodology Forty resin simulated C‐shaped canals were constructed and filled using one of four techniques...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | International endodontic journal 2015-08, Vol.48 (8), p.736-746 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 746 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 8 |
| container_start_page | 736 |
| container_title | International endodontic journal |
| container_volume | 48 |
| creator | Soo, W. K. M. Thong, Y. L. Gutmann, J. L. |
| description | Aim
To compare four gutta‐percha filling techniques in simulated C‐shaped canals based on filling quality at three cross‐sectional levels, filling time and the apical extrusion of gutta‐percha.
Methodology
Forty resin simulated C‐shaped canals were constructed and filled using one of four techniques: cold lateral compaction (LC), ultrasonic compaction (UC), single cone with injectable gutta‐percha (Obtura II™) (IT) and core‐carrier (Thermafil®) (CC). Cross sections were made at 1 (L1), 3 (L3) and 6 (L6) mm from the canal terminus. Areas of gutta‐percha, sealer and voids in each cross section were measured using an image analysis system. Data were analysed using a univariate general linear model and post hoc test (Dunnett's T3). Data on time taken to fill canals was evaluated using the Bonferroni post hoc test.
Results
CC had more gutta‐percha and less sealer compared with IT at L1 (P |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1111/iej.12371 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1694962184</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1694962184</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3981-e0d5f7c76ea9267519c0d5ea61827d3493fb54511f63cacc4a4847407bd31413</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kElPwzAQhS0EomU58AeQj3AI9cRbcqyqAoWKRUKCm-U6TuuSDTsR9N8TKHBjLm80-t7T6CF0AuQC-hk5u76AmErYQUOggkcxT2EXDQkwGsVJwgfoIIQ1IYQTCvtoEHOghAo2RI9jbOqy0d6FusJ1jvO683jZta2OGuvNSuPcFYWrlri1ZlW5t84G7CocXNkVurUZnkRhpZt-MbrSRThCe3kv9vhHD9HT5fRpch3N769mk_E8MjRNILIk47k0UlidxkJySE1_sVpAEsuMspTmC844QC6o0cYwzRImGZGLjAIDeojOtrGNr79-alXpgrFFoStbd0GBSFkqYkhYj55vUePrELzNVeNdqf1GAVFfBaq-QPVdYM-e_sR2i9Jmf-RvYz0w2gLvrrCb_5PUbHrzGxltHS609uPPof2rEpJKrp7vrtTk-gEke5Hqln4C1XKH-A</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1694962184</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A comparison of four gutta-percha filling techniques in simulated C-shaped canals</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Journals</source><creator>Soo, W. K. M. ; Thong, Y. L. ; Gutmann, J. L.</creator><creatorcontrib>Soo, W. K. M. ; Thong, Y. L. ; Gutmann, J. L.</creatorcontrib><description>Aim
To compare four gutta‐percha filling techniques in simulated C‐shaped canals based on filling quality at three cross‐sectional levels, filling time and the apical extrusion of gutta‐percha.
Methodology
Forty resin simulated C‐shaped canals were constructed and filled using one of four techniques: cold lateral compaction (LC), ultrasonic compaction (UC), single cone with injectable gutta‐percha (Obtura II™) (IT) and core‐carrier (Thermafil®) (CC). Cross sections were made at 1 (L1), 3 (L3) and 6 (L6) mm from the canal terminus. Areas of gutta‐percha, sealer and voids in each cross section were measured using an image analysis system. Data were analysed using a univariate general linear model and post hoc test (Dunnett's T3). Data on time taken to fill canals was evaluated using the Bonferroni post hoc test.
Results
CC had more gutta‐percha and less sealer compared with IT at L1 (P < 0.05). LC had marginally significantly less gutta‐percha than CC at this level (P = 0.049). At level 3 mm, significantly more gutta‐percha and less sealer were present in IT compared with LC (P < 0.05). The techniques showed no difference in quality at L6. The time for LC (20.72 min) was three times longer than for both IT (6.11 min) and CC (6.67 min), whereas for UC (26.92 min), it was four times longer (P < 0.001). Finally, the four techniques were not different in the occurrence of apical extrusion of gutta‐percha.
Conclusions
The core‐carrier technique was the most effective technique when assessed by gutta‐percha area in this simulated C‐shaped canal.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0143-2885</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1365-2591</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/iej.12371</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25130364</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>C-shaped canals ; Dentistry ; Gutta-Percha - chemistry ; Humans ; image analysis ; In Vitro Techniques ; Materials Testing ; Molar ; resin simulated canal ; Root Canal Filling Materials - chemistry ; root canal obturation ; Root Canal Preparation - instrumentation ; Surface Properties ; Time Factors</subject><ispartof>International endodontic journal, 2015-08, Vol.48 (8), p.736-746</ispartof><rights>2014 International Endodontic Journal. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd</rights><rights>2014 International Endodontic Journal. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3981-e0d5f7c76ea9267519c0d5ea61827d3493fb54511f63cacc4a4847407bd31413</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3981-e0d5f7c76ea9267519c0d5ea61827d3493fb54511f63cacc4a4847407bd31413</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fiej.12371$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fiej.12371$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,27924,27925,45574,45575</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25130364$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Soo, W. K. M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thong, Y. L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gutmann, J. L.</creatorcontrib><title>A comparison of four gutta-percha filling techniques in simulated C-shaped canals</title><title>International endodontic journal</title><addtitle>Int Endod J</addtitle><description>Aim
To compare four gutta‐percha filling techniques in simulated C‐shaped canals based on filling quality at three cross‐sectional levels, filling time and the apical extrusion of gutta‐percha.
Methodology
Forty resin simulated C‐shaped canals were constructed and filled using one of four techniques: cold lateral compaction (LC), ultrasonic compaction (UC), single cone with injectable gutta‐percha (Obtura II™) (IT) and core‐carrier (Thermafil®) (CC). Cross sections were made at 1 (L1), 3 (L3) and 6 (L6) mm from the canal terminus. Areas of gutta‐percha, sealer and voids in each cross section were measured using an image analysis system. Data were analysed using a univariate general linear model and post hoc test (Dunnett's T3). Data on time taken to fill canals was evaluated using the Bonferroni post hoc test.
Results
CC had more gutta‐percha and less sealer compared with IT at L1 (P < 0.05). LC had marginally significantly less gutta‐percha than CC at this level (P = 0.049). At level 3 mm, significantly more gutta‐percha and less sealer were present in IT compared with LC (P < 0.05). The techniques showed no difference in quality at L6. The time for LC (20.72 min) was three times longer than for both IT (6.11 min) and CC (6.67 min), whereas for UC (26.92 min), it was four times longer (P < 0.001). Finally, the four techniques were not different in the occurrence of apical extrusion of gutta‐percha.
Conclusions
The core‐carrier technique was the most effective technique when assessed by gutta‐percha area in this simulated C‐shaped canal.</description><subject>C-shaped canals</subject><subject>Dentistry</subject><subject>Gutta-Percha - chemistry</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>image analysis</subject><subject>In Vitro Techniques</subject><subject>Materials Testing</subject><subject>Molar</subject><subject>resin simulated canal</subject><subject>Root Canal Filling Materials - chemistry</subject><subject>root canal obturation</subject><subject>Root Canal Preparation - instrumentation</subject><subject>Surface Properties</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><issn>0143-2885</issn><issn>1365-2591</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kElPwzAQhS0EomU58AeQj3AI9cRbcqyqAoWKRUKCm-U6TuuSDTsR9N8TKHBjLm80-t7T6CF0AuQC-hk5u76AmErYQUOggkcxT2EXDQkwGsVJwgfoIIQ1IYQTCvtoEHOghAo2RI9jbOqy0d6FusJ1jvO683jZta2OGuvNSuPcFYWrlri1ZlW5t84G7CocXNkVurUZnkRhpZt-MbrSRThCe3kv9vhHD9HT5fRpch3N769mk_E8MjRNILIk47k0UlidxkJySE1_sVpAEsuMspTmC844QC6o0cYwzRImGZGLjAIDeojOtrGNr79-alXpgrFFoStbd0GBSFkqYkhYj55vUePrELzNVeNdqf1GAVFfBaq-QPVdYM-e_sR2i9Jmf-RvYz0w2gLvrrCb_5PUbHrzGxltHS609uPPof2rEpJKrp7vrtTk-gEke5Hqln4C1XKH-A</recordid><startdate>201508</startdate><enddate>201508</enddate><creator>Soo, W. K. M.</creator><creator>Thong, Y. L.</creator><creator>Gutmann, J. L.</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201508</creationdate><title>A comparison of four gutta-percha filling techniques in simulated C-shaped canals</title><author>Soo, W. K. M. ; Thong, Y. L. ; Gutmann, J. L.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3981-e0d5f7c76ea9267519c0d5ea61827d3493fb54511f63cacc4a4847407bd31413</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>C-shaped canals</topic><topic>Dentistry</topic><topic>Gutta-Percha - chemistry</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>image analysis</topic><topic>In Vitro Techniques</topic><topic>Materials Testing</topic><topic>Molar</topic><topic>resin simulated canal</topic><topic>Root Canal Filling Materials - chemistry</topic><topic>root canal obturation</topic><topic>Root Canal Preparation - instrumentation</topic><topic>Surface Properties</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Soo, W. K. M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thong, Y. L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gutmann, J. L.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>International endodontic journal</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Soo, W. K. M.</au><au>Thong, Y. L.</au><au>Gutmann, J. L.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A comparison of four gutta-percha filling techniques in simulated C-shaped canals</atitle><jtitle>International endodontic journal</jtitle><addtitle>Int Endod J</addtitle><date>2015-08</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>48</volume><issue>8</issue><spage>736</spage><epage>746</epage><pages>736-746</pages><issn>0143-2885</issn><eissn>1365-2591</eissn><abstract>Aim
To compare four gutta‐percha filling techniques in simulated C‐shaped canals based on filling quality at three cross‐sectional levels, filling time and the apical extrusion of gutta‐percha.
Methodology
Forty resin simulated C‐shaped canals were constructed and filled using one of four techniques: cold lateral compaction (LC), ultrasonic compaction (UC), single cone with injectable gutta‐percha (Obtura II™) (IT) and core‐carrier (Thermafil®) (CC). Cross sections were made at 1 (L1), 3 (L3) and 6 (L6) mm from the canal terminus. Areas of gutta‐percha, sealer and voids in each cross section were measured using an image analysis system. Data were analysed using a univariate general linear model and post hoc test (Dunnett's T3). Data on time taken to fill canals was evaluated using the Bonferroni post hoc test.
Results
CC had more gutta‐percha and less sealer compared with IT at L1 (P < 0.05). LC had marginally significantly less gutta‐percha than CC at this level (P = 0.049). At level 3 mm, significantly more gutta‐percha and less sealer were present in IT compared with LC (P < 0.05). The techniques showed no difference in quality at L6. The time for LC (20.72 min) was three times longer than for both IT (6.11 min) and CC (6.67 min), whereas for UC (26.92 min), it was four times longer (P < 0.001). Finally, the four techniques were not different in the occurrence of apical extrusion of gutta‐percha.
Conclusions
The core‐carrier technique was the most effective technique when assessed by gutta‐percha area in this simulated C‐shaped canal.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><pmid>25130364</pmid><doi>10.1111/iej.12371</doi><tpages>11</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0143-2885 |
| ispartof | International endodontic journal, 2015-08, Vol.48 (8), p.736-746 |
| issn | 0143-2885 1365-2591 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1694962184 |
| source | MEDLINE; Wiley Journals |
| subjects | C-shaped canals Dentistry Gutta-Percha - chemistry Humans image analysis In Vitro Techniques Materials Testing Molar resin simulated canal Root Canal Filling Materials - chemistry root canal obturation Root Canal Preparation - instrumentation Surface Properties Time Factors |
| title | A comparison of four gutta-percha filling techniques in simulated C-shaped canals |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-04T22%3A55%3A03IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20comparison%20of%20four%20gutta-percha%20filling%20techniques%20in%20simulated%20C-shaped%20canals&rft.jtitle=International%20endodontic%20journal&rft.au=Soo,%20W.%20K.%20M.&rft.date=2015-08&rft.volume=48&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=736&rft.epage=746&rft.pages=736-746&rft.issn=0143-2885&rft.eissn=1365-2591&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/iej.12371&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1694962184%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1694962184&rft_id=info:pmid/25130364&rfr_iscdi=true |