Journals / İstanbul Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi / 1998 / Cilt: 32 - Sayı: 3

The evaluation of the microleakage of 3 different retrograde filling materials

Üç farklı retrograd dolgu materyalinin mikrosızıntı açısından değerlendirilmesi

Pages
141–146
Publication Date
2022-11-04
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Differences between the three groups was statistically significant (p

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The aim of this in vitro study was to investigate the sealing ability of the high copper amalgam, EBA and IRM when used as retrograde filling material.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Each root was then apically resected at transverse to the root surface, and standardized apical cavity preperati-ons which had l.Smm diameter and 2.5 mm dept were made.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Differences between the three groups was statistically significant (p
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The aim of this in vitro study was to investigate the sealing ability of the high copper amalgam, EBA and IRM when used as retrograde filling material. Sixty single root teeth were prepared for root filling and obtured by single-cone gutta-percha technique and sealer (Sealapeks). Each root was then apically resected at transverse to the root surface, and standardized apical cavity preperati-ons which had l.Smm diameter and 2.5 mm dept were made. Sixty teeth were divided into three groups randomly, and each group was filled by one of the three materials. After all teeth were coated with nail polish, they were immersed in % 1 methylene blue dye solution for 72 hours. The teeth were then sectioned longitudinally and the dept of linear dye penetration was measured. Median dye penetration was 0.537±0.418 mm. in amalgam group, 0.734±0.325 mm. in EBA group and 1.287±0.383 mm. in IRM group. Differences between the three groups was statistically significant (p

Özet

Bu in vitro çalışmanın amacı, retrograd dolgu maddesi olarak yüksek bakirli amalgam, EBA ve IRM materyallerinin kapama yeteneklerini karşılaştırmaktı. Altmış adet tek köklü diş kök kanal dolgusu için hazırlandı ve kanal patı (Sealapex) ile beraber tek kon tekniği ile dolduruldu. Daha sonra her bir kök ucu, kök yüzeyine transvers bir şekilde kesildi. 1.5 mm. çaplı ve 2.5 mm. derinliğinde standart apikal kaviteler hazırlandı. Altmış adet diş rastgele 3 gruba ayrıldı ve her bir grup kullanılacak 3 materyalden biri ile dolduruldu. Tüm dişler tırnak cilası ile kaplandıktan sonra 72 saat %1'lik metilen mavisi boya solüsyonu içinde bekletildi. Daha sonra dişler uzunlamasına kesildi ve lineer boya penetrasyonunun derinliği ölçüldü. Ortalama boya penetrasyonu derinliği amalgam grubunda 0.537+0.418 mm., EBA grubunda 0.734+0.325 mm. ve IRM grubunda ise 1.287±0.383 mm. idi. Üç grup arasındaki farklılık istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bulundu (p

🔖

Cite This Article

BAKIR, Ş., ATAKUL, F. (2022). The evaluation of the microleakage of 3 different retrograde filling materials. İstanbul Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 32 - Sayı: 3, 141–146. https://ajindex.com/articles/652083

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (8)

  1. Abdal AK, Re rief DI I: The apical scal via the retro- surgical approach. I. A preliminaıy study. Oraf Surg Oral jed Orof f’ot/rol 1982: 53(6): 614-621. 2. l3oi4dra ML, et al: Leakage in vitro with IFtM, high copper ainalgam, and EBA ce1tein t üs retrofilling rnateri- °*' J•• •! ofEndodonti‹:s 1989. J 5(4). 157-160, 3. fathers SJ, Roahen JO: Evaluation of the apical se- al of amalgam retrofillings with the use of a root canal sea- ler interface. Orol Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1993: '7G(3): 4. Crooks WG, e t al: Longitudinal evaluation of the seal of IRM roo t end I+llings. Journal af Endodontics 1594: 20(.5): 250-21i2
  2. Friedman S. Retrograde approaches in endodontic therapy. Endod Dmt Trouniatol 1091: 7: 97-4 07
  3. Gartner AH, Dorn SO. Advances in endodontic surges. The Dental Clinics a/ ^'orf/t Amefica 1992: 36(2): 363-378
  4. Gerhards F, Wagner W. Sealing ability of £ive different retrograde filling mate -ials. /oitrnaf of Endodontics J996: 22(9): 463- 465
  5. King KT, et aI. Longitudinal evaluation of the seal of endodontic retrofi fling* J•• al of Endodontics l9tl0: 16(7): 30'7-S10
  6. O'Conuor Rf, Hutter, jW, Roahen, {O. Leakage of amalgam and Super-EBA roo t-en‹j fillings using two pre- paration techniques and surgical microscopy. Jouriio/ o/ Endodontics 1995: 21 (2): 74-78
  7. Owadally ID, e t al. The sealing ability of IRM with the addi tion of hydroxyapatite as a retrograde root Hi lling. r•dod Dent T aum«f 1993: S: 211-215
  8. I J. Pitt Ford TR, ct al. Effect of IRM rr,ot end fillings on healing after replantation J°• al of Endodontics 1994: 20(8): 381-385.