1
|
Cavalcanti MGP, Salineiro FC, Barros FM, Barros FBA. Influence of endodontic sealers artifacts in the detection of vertical root fractures. Braz Dent J 2022; 33:22-30. [DOI: 10.1590/0103-6440202204392] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/31/2021] [Accepted: 11/25/2021] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
Abstract The aim of this study was to compare the influence of endodontic sealers artifacts on the detection of vertical root fracture in cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). Premolars and central incisors were assigned into five different groups: Control, Pulp Canal Sealer, AH Plus, Sealer 26, and BC Sealer (n= 10, per group). VRFs were mechanically induced and the teeth were inserted into an image phantom. Subsequently, CBCT (Cranex 3Dx, Soredex, Tuusula, Finland) images were obtained and two observers were asked separately to identify root fracture, by visual analysis. For both premolar and central incisors, kappa coefficients of intraobserver agreement varied from good to excellent (K: 80% - 87%), and the values for interobserver agreement varied from fair to moderate (K: 30% - 35%). As follows, the area under the curve (AUC) of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) values for VRFs highlighted that the use of BC sealer reduced the observers’ ability to discriminate VRFs relative to other sealers. Moreover, sensitivity values for premolars teeth ranged from 20% to 60%, and specificity ranged from 60% to 100%; while sensitivity values for central incisors ranged from 30% to 70%, and specificity ranged from 70% to 100%. In conclusion, the low sensitivity values, mainly for premolars, demonstrated the difficulty in VRF diagnosis. Furthermore, BC Sealer induced significantly more imaging artifacts than other sealers. These results highlighting that endodontic sealers may interfere with the diagnosis of VRFs.
Collapse
|
2
|
The Influence of Root Canal Preparation with ProTaper Next, WaveOne Gold, and Twisted Files on Dentine Crack Formation. MACHINES 2021. [DOI: 10.3390/machines9120332] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
(1) Background: Root canal preparation constitutes an important factor for success in endodontics. However, various complications may occur during this stage. The aim of this study was to compare the incidence of cracks within radicular dentin after instrumentation with ProTaper Next (PTN), WaveOne Gold (WOG), and Twisted Files (TF), which utilize different kinematics. (2) Methods: Eighty single-rooted teeth were classified into four groups (n = 20). Three groups were instrumented using PTN (X1, X2), WOG (Primary), and TF (SM1–3). The non-instrumented group constituted the control group. Post-preparation, the roots were sectioned 3, 6, and 9 mm from the apex using a low-speed saw (Southbay Technology Inc., San Clemente, CA, USA). The specimens were viewed through a microscope at x25 magnification (Leica M320, Wetzlar, Germany), and their surface was assessed tactilely to determine the presence of the crack. (3) Results: Partial cracks within radicular dentine were observed in all study groups (PTN: n = 4/20%, WOG: n = 3/15%, TF: n = 4/20%); no cracks were observed in the control group. No significant differences were observed among experimental groups. OR values for the incidence of cracks were: OR = 11.182 for PTN, OR = 8.2 for WOG, and OR = 8.2 for TF. (4) Conclusions: Instrumentation with PTN, WOG, and TF may result in dentinal cracks formation.
Collapse
|