Impact of Conservative Endodontic Cavities on Root Canal Preparation and Biomechanical Behavior of Upper Premolars Restored with Different Materials
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of conservative endodontic cavities (CECs) on root canal preparation, restoration, and biomechanical behavior of teeth prepared using different shaping systems and restorative materials. Ninety upper premolars with a bifurcated root were matched b...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of endodontics 2021-06, Vol.47 (6), p.989-999 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 999 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 6 |
| container_start_page | 989 |
| container_title | Journal of endodontics |
| container_volume | 47 |
| creator | Pereira, Rodrigo Dantas Leoni, Graziela Bianchi Silva-Sousa, Yara Teresinha Gomes, Erica Alves Dias, Tatiane Rocco Brito-Júnior, Manoel Sousa-Neto, Manoel Damião |
| description | The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of conservative endodontic cavities (CECs) on root canal preparation, restoration, and biomechanical behavior of teeth prepared using different shaping systems and restorative materials.
Ninety upper premolars with a bifurcated root were matched based on morphology and randomly assigned to a control group (n = 10) or 1 of the following experimental groups (n = 40): traditional endodontic cavity and CEC. Teeth were subdivided according to instrumentation (n = 10) as follows: ProTaper Universal (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland), Reciproc (VDW GmbH, Munich, Germany), Reciproc Blue (VDW GmbH), and Hyflex EDM (Coltene/Whaledent, Altstätten, Switzerland). After canal obturation, teeth were restored using temporary material, conventional composite, regular bulk fill composite, or bulk fill flow combined with conventional composite. Before and after preparation and after obturation, the teeth were scanned using micro–computed tomographic imaging. Canal transportation (CT), the percentage of untouched canal surfaces (UCSs), voids in restoration (VRs), and residual filling material in the pulp chamber were evaluated. Finite element analysis, fracture resistance, and the failure pattern were recorded. The data were analyzed using analysis of variance and the Tukey and chi-square tests.
CECs had greater CT, percentage of filling material, and VRs compared with traditional endodontic cavities (P < .0001). The highest CT and UCSs were observed in CEC with ProTaper Universal. Bulk fill flow combined with conventional composite showed a lower percentage of VRs compared with other restorative materials (P < .05). Finite element analysis, fracture resistance, and failure pattern revealed similar behaviors in all groups (P > .05) .
CECs had a negative impact on root canal centralization, UCSs, cleaning of the pulp chamber, and percentage of VRs. Controlled memory instruments were the most adequate for the root canal preparation of CECs. The endodontic cavity did not influence the biomechanical behavior of restored teeth. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.joen.2021.03.009 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2506508930</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0099239921001953</els_id><sourcerecordid>2506508930</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-ddd32fa0adce5c63f97f59c47f5b99fe181a5f7569644a108ff308ec5f1858933</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kc9u3CAQxlHVqtkkfYEcIo692AFjbCP10mzzT0rVKGrOiMCgZWWDC-xGfY8-cLA27bGXGWn4fZ-G-RA6o6SmhHYX23obwNcNaWhNWE2IeIdWdOiHinHevkerMhFVw4Q4QscpbQmhPWP9R3RUat-Slq_Qn7tpVjrjYPE6-ARxr7LbA77yJpjgs9N4rfYuO0g4ePwYQi4Dr0b8EGFWsdBlrLzBly5MoDfKO11eL2FTZCEuxk_zDHHhpzCqmPAjpBwiGPzi8gZ_c9ZCBJ_xd5UhOjWmU_TBlgaf3voJerq--rm-re5_3Nytv95XmvEuV8YY1lhFlNHAdces6C0Xui31WQgLdKCK2553omtbRclgLSMDaG7pwAfB2An6fPCdY_i1K1vJySUN46g8hF2SDScdJ4UkBW0OqI4hpQhWztFNKv6WlMglDbmVSxpySUMSJsvti-j8zX_3PIH5J_l7_gJ8OQBQfrl3EGXSDrwG4yLoLE1w__N_BW4znkQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2506508930</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Impact of Conservative Endodontic Cavities on Root Canal Preparation and Biomechanical Behavior of Upper Premolars Restored with Different Materials</title><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Pereira, Rodrigo Dantas ; Leoni, Graziela Bianchi ; Silva-Sousa, Yara Teresinha ; Gomes, Erica Alves ; Dias, Tatiane Rocco ; Brito-Júnior, Manoel ; Sousa-Neto, Manoel Damião</creator><creatorcontrib>Pereira, Rodrigo Dantas ; Leoni, Graziela Bianchi ; Silva-Sousa, Yara Teresinha ; Gomes, Erica Alves ; Dias, Tatiane Rocco ; Brito-Júnior, Manoel ; Sousa-Neto, Manoel Damião</creatorcontrib><description>The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of conservative endodontic cavities (CECs) on root canal preparation, restoration, and biomechanical behavior of teeth prepared using different shaping systems and restorative materials.
Ninety upper premolars with a bifurcated root were matched based on morphology and randomly assigned to a control group (n = 10) or 1 of the following experimental groups (n = 40): traditional endodontic cavity and CEC. Teeth were subdivided according to instrumentation (n = 10) as follows: ProTaper Universal (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland), Reciproc (VDW GmbH, Munich, Germany), Reciproc Blue (VDW GmbH), and Hyflex EDM (Coltene/Whaledent, Altstätten, Switzerland). After canal obturation, teeth were restored using temporary material, conventional composite, regular bulk fill composite, or bulk fill flow combined with conventional composite. Before and after preparation and after obturation, the teeth were scanned using micro–computed tomographic imaging. Canal transportation (CT), the percentage of untouched canal surfaces (UCSs), voids in restoration (VRs), and residual filling material in the pulp chamber were evaluated. Finite element analysis, fracture resistance, and the failure pattern were recorded. The data were analyzed using analysis of variance and the Tukey and chi-square tests.
CECs had greater CT, percentage of filling material, and VRs compared with traditional endodontic cavities (P < .0001). The highest CT and UCSs were observed in CEC with ProTaper Universal. Bulk fill flow combined with conventional composite showed a lower percentage of VRs compared with other restorative materials (P < .05). Finite element analysis, fracture resistance, and failure pattern revealed similar behaviors in all groups (P > .05) .
CECs had a negative impact on root canal centralization, UCSs, cleaning of the pulp chamber, and percentage of VRs. Controlled memory instruments were the most adequate for the root canal preparation of CECs. The endodontic cavity did not influence the biomechanical behavior of restored teeth.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0099-2399</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1878-3554</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2021.03.009</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33774045</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Composite restorations ; conservative endodontic cavity ; Dentistry ; fracture resistance ; microcomputed tomography ; premolars ; traditional endodontic cavity</subject><ispartof>Journal of endodontics, 2021-06, Vol.47 (6), p.989-999</ispartof><rights>2021 American Association of Endodontists</rights><rights>Copyright © 2021 American Association of Endodontists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-ddd32fa0adce5c63f97f59c47f5b99fe181a5f7569644a108ff308ec5f1858933</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-ddd32fa0adce5c63f97f59c47f5b99fe181a5f7569644a108ff308ec5f1858933</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2021.03.009$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33774045$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Pereira, Rodrigo Dantas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Leoni, Graziela Bianchi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Silva-Sousa, Yara Teresinha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gomes, Erica Alves</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dias, Tatiane Rocco</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brito-Júnior, Manoel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sousa-Neto, Manoel Damião</creatorcontrib><title>Impact of Conservative Endodontic Cavities on Root Canal Preparation and Biomechanical Behavior of Upper Premolars Restored with Different Materials</title><title>Journal of endodontics</title><addtitle>J Endod</addtitle><description>The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of conservative endodontic cavities (CECs) on root canal preparation, restoration, and biomechanical behavior of teeth prepared using different shaping systems and restorative materials.
Ninety upper premolars with a bifurcated root were matched based on morphology and randomly assigned to a control group (n = 10) or 1 of the following experimental groups (n = 40): traditional endodontic cavity and CEC. Teeth were subdivided according to instrumentation (n = 10) as follows: ProTaper Universal (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland), Reciproc (VDW GmbH, Munich, Germany), Reciproc Blue (VDW GmbH), and Hyflex EDM (Coltene/Whaledent, Altstätten, Switzerland). After canal obturation, teeth were restored using temporary material, conventional composite, regular bulk fill composite, or bulk fill flow combined with conventional composite. Before and after preparation and after obturation, the teeth were scanned using micro–computed tomographic imaging. Canal transportation (CT), the percentage of untouched canal surfaces (UCSs), voids in restoration (VRs), and residual filling material in the pulp chamber were evaluated. Finite element analysis, fracture resistance, and the failure pattern were recorded. The data were analyzed using analysis of variance and the Tukey and chi-square tests.
CECs had greater CT, percentage of filling material, and VRs compared with traditional endodontic cavities (P < .0001). The highest CT and UCSs were observed in CEC with ProTaper Universal. Bulk fill flow combined with conventional composite showed a lower percentage of VRs compared with other restorative materials (P < .05). Finite element analysis, fracture resistance, and failure pattern revealed similar behaviors in all groups (P > .05) .
CECs had a negative impact on root canal centralization, UCSs, cleaning of the pulp chamber, and percentage of VRs. Controlled memory instruments were the most adequate for the root canal preparation of CECs. The endodontic cavity did not influence the biomechanical behavior of restored teeth.</description><subject>Composite restorations</subject><subject>conservative endodontic cavity</subject><subject>Dentistry</subject><subject>fracture resistance</subject><subject>microcomputed tomography</subject><subject>premolars</subject><subject>traditional endodontic cavity</subject><issn>0099-2399</issn><issn>1878-3554</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kc9u3CAQxlHVqtkkfYEcIo692AFjbCP10mzzT0rVKGrOiMCgZWWDC-xGfY8-cLA27bGXGWn4fZ-G-RA6o6SmhHYX23obwNcNaWhNWE2IeIdWdOiHinHevkerMhFVw4Q4QscpbQmhPWP9R3RUat-Slq_Qn7tpVjrjYPE6-ARxr7LbA77yJpjgs9N4rfYuO0g4ePwYQi4Dr0b8EGFWsdBlrLzBly5MoDfKO11eL2FTZCEuxk_zDHHhpzCqmPAjpBwiGPzi8gZ_c9ZCBJ_xd5UhOjWmU_TBlgaf3voJerq--rm-re5_3Nytv95XmvEuV8YY1lhFlNHAdces6C0Xui31WQgLdKCK2553omtbRclgLSMDaG7pwAfB2An6fPCdY_i1K1vJySUN46g8hF2SDScdJ4UkBW0OqI4hpQhWztFNKv6WlMglDbmVSxpySUMSJsvti-j8zX_3PIH5J_l7_gJ8OQBQfrl3EGXSDrwG4yLoLE1w__N_BW4znkQ</recordid><startdate>20210601</startdate><enddate>20210601</enddate><creator>Pereira, Rodrigo Dantas</creator><creator>Leoni, Graziela Bianchi</creator><creator>Silva-Sousa, Yara Teresinha</creator><creator>Gomes, Erica Alves</creator><creator>Dias, Tatiane Rocco</creator><creator>Brito-Júnior, Manoel</creator><creator>Sousa-Neto, Manoel Damião</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20210601</creationdate><title>Impact of Conservative Endodontic Cavities on Root Canal Preparation and Biomechanical Behavior of Upper Premolars Restored with Different Materials</title><author>Pereira, Rodrigo Dantas ; Leoni, Graziela Bianchi ; Silva-Sousa, Yara Teresinha ; Gomes, Erica Alves ; Dias, Tatiane Rocco ; Brito-Júnior, Manoel ; Sousa-Neto, Manoel Damião</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-ddd32fa0adce5c63f97f59c47f5b99fe181a5f7569644a108ff308ec5f1858933</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Composite restorations</topic><topic>conservative endodontic cavity</topic><topic>Dentistry</topic><topic>fracture resistance</topic><topic>microcomputed tomography</topic><topic>premolars</topic><topic>traditional endodontic cavity</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Pereira, Rodrigo Dantas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Leoni, Graziela Bianchi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Silva-Sousa, Yara Teresinha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gomes, Erica Alves</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dias, Tatiane Rocco</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brito-Júnior, Manoel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sousa-Neto, Manoel Damião</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of endodontics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Pereira, Rodrigo Dantas</au><au>Leoni, Graziela Bianchi</au><au>Silva-Sousa, Yara Teresinha</au><au>Gomes, Erica Alves</au><au>Dias, Tatiane Rocco</au><au>Brito-Júnior, Manoel</au><au>Sousa-Neto, Manoel Damião</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Impact of Conservative Endodontic Cavities on Root Canal Preparation and Biomechanical Behavior of Upper Premolars Restored with Different Materials</atitle><jtitle>Journal of endodontics</jtitle><addtitle>J Endod</addtitle><date>2021-06-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>47</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>989</spage><epage>999</epage><pages>989-999</pages><issn>0099-2399</issn><eissn>1878-3554</eissn><abstract>The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of conservative endodontic cavities (CECs) on root canal preparation, restoration, and biomechanical behavior of teeth prepared using different shaping systems and restorative materials.
Ninety upper premolars with a bifurcated root were matched based on morphology and randomly assigned to a control group (n = 10) or 1 of the following experimental groups (n = 40): traditional endodontic cavity and CEC. Teeth were subdivided according to instrumentation (n = 10) as follows: ProTaper Universal (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland), Reciproc (VDW GmbH, Munich, Germany), Reciproc Blue (VDW GmbH), and Hyflex EDM (Coltene/Whaledent, Altstätten, Switzerland). After canal obturation, teeth were restored using temporary material, conventional composite, regular bulk fill composite, or bulk fill flow combined with conventional composite. Before and after preparation and after obturation, the teeth were scanned using micro–computed tomographic imaging. Canal transportation (CT), the percentage of untouched canal surfaces (UCSs), voids in restoration (VRs), and residual filling material in the pulp chamber were evaluated. Finite element analysis, fracture resistance, and the failure pattern were recorded. The data were analyzed using analysis of variance and the Tukey and chi-square tests.
CECs had greater CT, percentage of filling material, and VRs compared with traditional endodontic cavities (P < .0001). The highest CT and UCSs were observed in CEC with ProTaper Universal. Bulk fill flow combined with conventional composite showed a lower percentage of VRs compared with other restorative materials (P < .05). Finite element analysis, fracture resistance, and failure pattern revealed similar behaviors in all groups (P > .05) .
CECs had a negative impact on root canal centralization, UCSs, cleaning of the pulp chamber, and percentage of VRs. Controlled memory instruments were the most adequate for the root canal preparation of CECs. The endodontic cavity did not influence the biomechanical behavior of restored teeth.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>33774045</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.joen.2021.03.009</doi><tpages>11</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0099-2399 |
| ispartof | Journal of endodontics, 2021-06, Vol.47 (6), p.989-999 |
| issn | 0099-2399 1878-3554 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2506508930 |
| source | Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier) |
| subjects | Composite restorations conservative endodontic cavity Dentistry fracture resistance microcomputed tomography premolars traditional endodontic cavity |
| title | Impact of Conservative Endodontic Cavities on Root Canal Preparation and Biomechanical Behavior of Upper Premolars Restored with Different Materials |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-27T15%3A33%3A08IST&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=Impact%20of%20Conservative%20Endodontic%20Cavities%20on%20Root%20Canal%20Preparation%20and%20Biomechanical%20Behavior%20of%20Upper%20Premolars%20Restored%20with%20Different%20Materials&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20endodontics&rft.au=Pereira,%20Rodrigo%20Dantas&rft.date=2021-06-01&rft.volume=47&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=989&rft.epage=999&rft.pages=989-999&rft.issn=0099-2399&rft.eissn=1878-3554&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.joen.2021.03.009&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2506508930%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=2506508930&rft_id=info:pmid/33774045&rft_els_id=S0099239921001953&rfr_iscdi=true |