A Comparative Evaluation of Efficacy of Various Obturating Techniques for the Presence of Voids

Author:

Khan Rehan Ahmad1,Singh Shailja2,Siddiqui Shazia3,Khan Mariyam4,Ahmad Arfat5,Shakarwal Parul5

Affiliation:

1. Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Mithila Minority Dental College, Darbhanga, Bihar, India

2. Private Practitioner, Endodontist, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India

3. Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, TMU, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh, India

4. Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Career Institute of Dental Sciences and Hospital, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India

5. Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Sardar Patel Postgraduate Institute of Dental and Medical Sciences, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India

Abstract

ABSTRACT Aim: Evaluation of the efficacy of different obturating techniques and assessment of the presence of voids in different regions of the canal. Materials and Methods: Sixty permanent single-rooted teeth with complete, mature root apices without any anatomic variation having straight patent root canals were included in the present study. Access cavity preparation followed by biomechanical preparation was done. Samples were divided into three groups—Group A: Single cone obturation, Group B: GuttaFlow 2, and Group C: GuttaCore, and obturation was carried out. The samples after obturation were stored at 370°C and 100% humidity in an incubator for 7 days to give adequate time for obturating materials to set. Cone beam computed tomography was performed with i-cat Cb 500 machine. The voids were checked on the root canal wall. The statistical analysis was done and the data after the statistical analysis was presented. Result: GuttaCore obturators presented a lesser volume of voids followed by GuttaFlow 2 than the single cone techniques. Conclusion: All the obturation techniques presented an inadequacy of obturation when the pre- and post-obturated volume of the root canal space was calculated. However, no statistically significant obturated volume differences were found between single cone and GuttaFlow 2 or between GuttaFlow 2 and GuttaCore system.

Publisher

Medknow

Subject

General Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics,General Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology,Bioengineering,General Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics,General Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology,Bioengineering

Reference9 articles.

1. Micro CT evaluation of voids in the filling material of single rooted teeth obturated with different techniques;Asheibi;J Res Pract Dent,2014

2. Comparison of the quality of root filling achieved using five different obturation techniques;Gravrea;Endodontology,2007

3. Comparison of obturation quality in modified continuous wave compaction, continuous wave compaction, lateral compaction and warm vertical compaction techniques;Aminsobhani;J Dent,2015

4. Comparative evaluation of newer obturating systems using cone beam computed tomography and direct digital radiography;Mukadam;Mouth Teeth,2018

5. Effect of root canal filling materials on dimensions of cone-beam computed tomography images;Decurcio;J Appl Oral Sci,2012

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3