Fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth using three novel nickel-titanium file systems" >Fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth using three novel nickel-titanium file systems" >Fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth using three novel nickel-titanium file systems" >

<span lang="EN-IN">Fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth using three novel nickel-titanium <span lang="EN-IN">file systems

سال انتشار: 1405
نوع سند: مقاله ژورنالی
زبان: انگلیسی
مشاهده: 77

فایل این مقاله در 7 صفحه با فرمت PDF قابل دریافت می باشد

استخراج به نرم افزارهای پژوهشی:

لینک ثابت به این مقاله:

شناسه ملی سند علمی:

JR_JDMT-15-2_002

تاریخ نمایه سازی: 13 مرداد 1405

چکیده مقاله:

Objective: The present study compared the fracture resistance of mandibular premolars instrumented using ProTaper NEXT, TruNatomy, and Neohybrid nickel-titanium (NiTi) file systems.Methods: In this in vitro study, ۵۶ extracted mandibular premolars were decoronated to obtain standardized root lengths of ۱۶ mm. The samples were divided into four groups (n=۱۴): Group I, no instrumentation (control); Group II, instrumentation with ProTaper NEXT files (Dentsply Maillefer); Group III, instrumentation with TruNatomy files (Dentsply Sirona); and Group IV, instrumentation with Neohybrid files (Orikam Healthcare). Following instrumentation, the samples were obturated using the cold lateral compaction technique with gutta-percha and AH Plus sealer. After one week, a vertical load was applied using a universal testing machine. The maximum load required to cause a root fracture was recorded in Newtons (N). Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Tukey’s post-hoc test at the significance level of P<۰.۰۵.Results: The control group exhibited the highest mean fracture resistance (۷۷۴.۳۱ ± ۱۴۰.۸۲ N), followed by TruNatomy (۷۳۲.۷۸ ± ۱۲۸.۲۴ N), Neohybrid (۶۷۹.۶۵ ± ۱۸۵.۷۸ N), and ProTaper NEXT (۶۰۶.۷۷ ± ۱۴۴.۸۵ N) groups. ANOVA revealed a statistically significant difference among the groups (P=۰.۰۳۱). ProTaper NEXT showed significantly lower fracture resistance than the control group (P<۰.۰۵). The TruNatomy and Neohybrid groups showed no statistically significant differences compared with either the control group or the ProTaper NEXT group (P>۰.۰۵).Conclusions: Within the limitations of this in vitro study, all file systems reduced root fracture resistance; however, only ProTaper NEXT caused a significant reduction compared with the control group.

نویسندگان

Durga Bhavani Panithini

Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Vishnu Dental College and Hospital, Bhimavaram, Andhra Pradesh, India

Sita Rama Kumar Manthena

Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Vishnu Dental College and Hospital, Bhimavaram, Andhra Pradesh, India

Girija Sajjan

Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Vishnu Dental College and Hospital, Bhimavaram, Andhra Pradesh, India

Madhu Varma Kanumuri

Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Vishnu Dental College and Hospital, Bhimavaram, Andhra Pradesh, India

Praveen Dalavai

Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Vishnu Dental College and Hospital, Bhimavaram, Andhra Pradesh, India

Jagapathi Babu Mavidi

Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Vishnu Dental College and Hospital, Bhimavaram, Andhra Pradesh, India

مراجع و منابع این مقاله:

لیست زیر مراجع و منابع استفاده شده در این مقاله را نمایش می دهد. این مراجع به صورت کاملا ماشینی و بر اساس هوش مصنوعی استخراج شده اند و لذا ممکن است دارای اشکالاتی باشند که به مرور زمان دقت استخراج این محتوا افزایش می یابد. مراجعی که مقالات مربوط به آنها در سیویلیکا نمایه شده و پیدا شده اند، به خود مقاله لینک شده اند :
  • Tait C, Camilleri J, Blundell K. Non-surgical endodontics - obturation. ...
  • Singh P, Deshpande YD, Rai KS, Rai P, Sinha P, ...
  • Gu S, Yang Y. Clinical outcomes of vital pulp therapy ...
  • Chandolu V, Mandava J, Borugadda R, Sirisha K, Kumar KR, ...
  • Elmatary A, Moawad E, Heidarifar O, Stone S. Endodontic access ...
  • Mesgarani A, Zakariaie JA, Ebrahimi A, Haghanifar S, Mollaei M, ...
  • Luo X, Zhang W, Han N, Xue B, Lin Z. ...
  • Lee K, Patel S, Ahlowalia M, Alfayate RP, Foschi F. ...
  • Hsiao L-T, Ho J-C, Huang C-F, Hung W-C, Chang C-W. ...
  • Pawar AM, Pawar MG, Thakur B, Banga KS, Luke AM. ...
  • Kurşun H, Gökyay SS, Yalçın TY, Dinçol ME. Evaluation of ...
  • Kwon SK, Seog M, Kim D, Jung IY. Impact of ...
  • Kang YJ, Kwak SW, Ha JH, Gambarini G, Kim HC. ...
  • Vardar Korkman Ç, Haznedaroğlu F. Comparison of postoperative pain after ...
  • Capar ID, Ertas H, Ok E, Arslan H, Ertas ET. ...
  • de Oliveira Neto RS, Alcalde MP, Titato PCG, Calefi PHS, ...
  • Kabil E, Katić M, Anić I, Bago I. Micro-computed evaluation ...
  • Jahangeer B, Arya A, Elsa Oommen T, Naga Vamseekrishna KV, ...
  • Nur BG, Ok E, Altunsoy M, Tanriver M, Capar ID. ...
  • Jetty SD, Kanumuri MV, Sajjan G, Rajulapati KS, Mudunuri S, ...
  • Dhingra A, Ruhal N, Miglani A. Evaluation of Single File ...
  • Elnaghy AM, Elsaka SE, Mandorah AO. In vitro comparison of ...
  • Priyadarshni P, Nagpal A, Arif A, Sharma A, Rahman M, ...
  • Sabeti M, Kazem M, Dianat O, Bahrololumi N, Beglou A, ...
  • Doğanay Yıldız E, Fidan ME, Sakarya RE, Dinçer B. The ...
  • Khan SA, Nagpal R, Singh UP, Mehmood N, Agarwal M, ...
  • Khdairah HR, Al-Gharrawi HA. The effect of canal preparation using ...
  • نمایش کامل مراجع