33 resultados para End User Queries
Resumo:
Objective. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the pH and calcium ion release of 6 materials used for root-end filling and perforation repair. Study design. Gray ProRoot MTA, gray MTA-Angelus, white MTA-Angelus, and CPM were compared to 2 experimental ones: MTA-exp, also based in Portland cement with a modified mixing liquid, and MBPc, an epoxy-resin based cement containing calcium hydroxide. After 3, 24, 72, and 168 hours the water in which each sample had been immersed was tested to determine the ph and calcium ion release. Results. All the analyzed materials showed alkaline pH and capacity to release calcium ions; however, a tendency of reduction of these characteristics was noted for all the analyzed materials, except for the MBPc, which showed a slight increase of pH among the 3 initial periods. Conclusion. The results suggest that all materials investigated presented alkaline pH and ability of release of calcium ions. (Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2009; 108: 135-139)
Resumo:
This study compared ultrasonic chemical vapor deposition (CVD)-coated tip (CVDentus #8.1117-1; Clorovale Diamantes Ind. e Com. Ltda Epp, Sao Jose dos Campos, SP, Brazil) versus high-speed (#FG700L) and low-speed (#699) carbide burs for apicoectomy, evaluating the time required for resection and analyzing the root-end surfaces by scanning electron microscopy. Thirty extracted human premolars had the canals instrumented and obturated and were randomly assigned to 3 groups (n = 10), according to the instrument used for root-end resection. The time required for resection of the apical 2 mm of each root was recorded. The resected apical segments were dried, sputter coated with gold, and examined with a scanning electron microscope at X 350 magnification. A four-point (0-3) scoring system was used to evaluate the apical surface smoothness. The results were analyzed statistically by the Kruskal-Wallis test and two-by-two comparisons analyses were performed using the Miller test. The significance level was set at 5%. Root-end resection with the high-speed bur was significantly faster (p < 0.05) compared with the low-speed bur and CVD tip. The carbide burs produced significantly smoother root-end surfaces than the CVD tip (p < 0.05). The low-speed bur produced the smoothest root-end surfaces, whereas the roughest and most irregular root ends (p < 0.05) were obtained with the CVD tip. However, no statistically significant difference (p > 0.05) was found between the high- and low-speed burs regarding the surface roughness of the resected root ends (p > 0.05). In conclusion, under the tested conditions, ultrasonic root-end resection took a longer time and resulted in rougher surfaces compared with the use of carbide burs at both high and low speed. (J Endod 2009;35:265-268)
Resumo:
P>Aim To evaluate by 3D profilometry and scanning electron microscopy (SEM), the marginal adaptation of mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) and Sealer 26 placed in root-end cavities with direct vision or under an optical microscope. Methodology The root ends of 52 root filled canine teeth were filled with MTA or Sealer 26 under direct vision or optical microscope (n = 13). In each group, eight specimens were analysed by profilometry for measurement of the area and depth of gaps. In the other five specimens, gap area was measured using SEM to verify marginal adaptation and surface characteristic. Data were analysed by parametric (anova and Tukey) and non-parametric (Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn) tests. Results The assessment of the adaptation of both materials to dentine was not influenced by the mode of visualization, which was confirmed by both profilometry and SEM observations. The voids measured with profilometry for Sealer 26 under direct vision were significantly wider and deeper than those for MTA under direct vision (P < 0.05). In SEM, significantly larger gap areas were observed with Sealer 26 (P < 0.05). Conclusion Root-end cavities filled with MTA had smaller gaps and better marginal adaptation than Sealer 26.