Comparison between the use of thermoplasticized gutta-percha and a polydimethyl siloxane-based material in filling internal resorptive cavities using spiral computed tomography

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

To evaluate the fill of internal resorption cavities obturated with thermoplasticized gutta-percha and GuttaFlow2 using CT scan. Twenty human maxillary anterior teeth were selected and root canals were prepared using ProTaper system to size F3. Irrigation was performed with 5 ml of 2.5% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) and 5 ml of 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA). Each root was then sectioned horizontally into two halves and semicircular cavities were prepared around the periphery of the root canal opening of each root half, using a round bur. Both the root halves were then fixed using cyanoacrylate glue. All the specimens were subjected to preoperative CT scan analysis to determine the volume of internal cavities. The samples were then randomly divided into two groups. In Group 1, the specimens were obturated with thermoplasticized gutta-percha (E&Q system) and specimens in Group 2 were obturated using GuttaFlow2. All specimens were then subjected to postoperative CT scan analysis. The volume of voids in internal resorptive cavities were calculated, which was then used to estimate the amount of gutta-percha filled. There was no significant difference in volume of internal resorptive cavities between thermoplasticized gutta-percha and GuttaFlow2 groups before obturation (p = 0.466). However, after obturation there was a significant difference between both the groups, in which GuttaFlow2 demonstrated better fill (p =.014). Thermoplasticized gutta-percha filled 81% of internal resorptive cavity while GuttaFlow2 filled 91%, respectively. GuttaFlow2 showed better fill than thermoplasticized gutta-percha in the filling of internal resorptive cavities.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)149-152
Number of pages4
JournalMicroscopy Research and Technique
Volume82
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 01-02-2019

Fingerprint

Siloxanes
Gutta-Percha
Computerized tomography
Spiral Computed Tomography
siloxanes
Tomography
tomography
Canals
cavities
Glues
Dental Pulp Cavity
Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid
canals
Irrigation
Sodium
Cyanoacrylates
Sodium Hypochlorite
irrigation
glues
ethylenediaminetetraacetic acids

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Anatomy
  • Histology
  • Instrumentation
  • Medical Laboratory Technology

Cite this

@article{a12bd6b963f9447a92a6113bc13f2dc1,
title = "Comparison between the use of thermoplasticized gutta-percha and a polydimethyl siloxane-based material in filling internal resorptive cavities using spiral computed tomography",
abstract = "To evaluate the fill of internal resorption cavities obturated with thermoplasticized gutta-percha and GuttaFlow2 using CT scan. Twenty human maxillary anterior teeth were selected and root canals were prepared using ProTaper system to size F3. Irrigation was performed with 5 ml of 2.5{\%} sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) and 5 ml of 17{\%} ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA). Each root was then sectioned horizontally into two halves and semicircular cavities were prepared around the periphery of the root canal opening of each root half, using a round bur. Both the root halves were then fixed using cyanoacrylate glue. All the specimens were subjected to preoperative CT scan analysis to determine the volume of internal cavities. The samples were then randomly divided into two groups. In Group 1, the specimens were obturated with thermoplasticized gutta-percha (E&Q system) and specimens in Group 2 were obturated using GuttaFlow2. All specimens were then subjected to postoperative CT scan analysis. The volume of voids in internal resorptive cavities were calculated, which was then used to estimate the amount of gutta-percha filled. There was no significant difference in volume of internal resorptive cavities between thermoplasticized gutta-percha and GuttaFlow2 groups before obturation (p = 0.466). However, after obturation there was a significant difference between both the groups, in which GuttaFlow2 demonstrated better fill (p =.014). Thermoplasticized gutta-percha filled 81{\%} of internal resorptive cavity while GuttaFlow2 filled 91{\%}, respectively. GuttaFlow2 showed better fill than thermoplasticized gutta-percha in the filling of internal resorptive cavities.",
author = "Himanshu Jain and Ballal, {Nidambur Vasudev}",
year = "2019",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1002/jemt.23163",
language = "English",
volume = "82",
pages = "149--152",
journal = "Microscopy Research and Technique",
issn = "1059-910X",
publisher = "Wiley-Liss Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison between the use of thermoplasticized gutta-percha and a polydimethyl siloxane-based material in filling internal resorptive cavities using spiral computed tomography

AU - Jain, Himanshu

AU - Ballal, Nidambur Vasudev

PY - 2019/2/1

Y1 - 2019/2/1

N2 - To evaluate the fill of internal resorption cavities obturated with thermoplasticized gutta-percha and GuttaFlow2 using CT scan. Twenty human maxillary anterior teeth were selected and root canals were prepared using ProTaper system to size F3. Irrigation was performed with 5 ml of 2.5% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) and 5 ml of 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA). Each root was then sectioned horizontally into two halves and semicircular cavities were prepared around the periphery of the root canal opening of each root half, using a round bur. Both the root halves were then fixed using cyanoacrylate glue. All the specimens were subjected to preoperative CT scan analysis to determine the volume of internal cavities. The samples were then randomly divided into two groups. In Group 1, the specimens were obturated with thermoplasticized gutta-percha (E&Q system) and specimens in Group 2 were obturated using GuttaFlow2. All specimens were then subjected to postoperative CT scan analysis. The volume of voids in internal resorptive cavities were calculated, which was then used to estimate the amount of gutta-percha filled. There was no significant difference in volume of internal resorptive cavities between thermoplasticized gutta-percha and GuttaFlow2 groups before obturation (p = 0.466). However, after obturation there was a significant difference between both the groups, in which GuttaFlow2 demonstrated better fill (p =.014). Thermoplasticized gutta-percha filled 81% of internal resorptive cavity while GuttaFlow2 filled 91%, respectively. GuttaFlow2 showed better fill than thermoplasticized gutta-percha in the filling of internal resorptive cavities.

AB - To evaluate the fill of internal resorption cavities obturated with thermoplasticized gutta-percha and GuttaFlow2 using CT scan. Twenty human maxillary anterior teeth were selected and root canals were prepared using ProTaper system to size F3. Irrigation was performed with 5 ml of 2.5% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) and 5 ml of 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA). Each root was then sectioned horizontally into two halves and semicircular cavities were prepared around the periphery of the root canal opening of each root half, using a round bur. Both the root halves were then fixed using cyanoacrylate glue. All the specimens were subjected to preoperative CT scan analysis to determine the volume of internal cavities. The samples were then randomly divided into two groups. In Group 1, the specimens were obturated with thermoplasticized gutta-percha (E&Q system) and specimens in Group 2 were obturated using GuttaFlow2. All specimens were then subjected to postoperative CT scan analysis. The volume of voids in internal resorptive cavities were calculated, which was then used to estimate the amount of gutta-percha filled. There was no significant difference in volume of internal resorptive cavities between thermoplasticized gutta-percha and GuttaFlow2 groups before obturation (p = 0.466). However, after obturation there was a significant difference between both the groups, in which GuttaFlow2 demonstrated better fill (p =.014). Thermoplasticized gutta-percha filled 81% of internal resorptive cavity while GuttaFlow2 filled 91%, respectively. GuttaFlow2 showed better fill than thermoplasticized gutta-percha in the filling of internal resorptive cavities.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85058468432&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85058468432&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/jemt.23163

DO - 10.1002/jemt.23163

M3 - Article

C2 - 30556275

AN - SCOPUS:85058468432

VL - 82

SP - 149

EP - 152

JO - Microscopy Research and Technique

JF - Microscopy Research and Technique

SN - 1059-910X

IS - 2

ER -