Microleakage Evaluation Around Retrograde Filling Materials Prepared Using Conventional and Ultrasonic Techniques
Clicks: 226
ID: 264696
2015
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Popular Article
30.3
/100
226 views
37 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
PopularRanked #10 of 11 articles by views in journal of clinical and diagnostic research
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Introduction: The importance of the retrograde cavity preparation
and the material used to restore is of utmost importance to achieve
successful surgical endodontics.
Aim: The aim of the present study is to evaluate the apical microleakage of root end cavities filled with Mineral trioxide aggregate,
Biodentine and light cure GIC using two different cavity preparation
techniques that is conventional bur preparation and ultrasonic tip
preparation.
Materials and Methods: Eighty extracted single rooted human
teeth (except mandibular incisors) with one canal, fully developed
apices and without any major carious lesion are collected for
the study. The teeth were sectioned at CEJ to standardize the
length. Roots are instrumented upto master apical file 40 K size
and obturated with gutta percha and AH plus sealer in lateral
condensation technique. The teeth were then resected apically at
90° angle axis to the long axis of the root removing 3 mm of the
apex.
The teeth were divided in to four groups of 20 each-
• Group I- samples restored with MTA.
• Group II- samples restored with Biodentine.
• Group III- (Positive control group)- samples restored with
Light activated GIC.
• Group IV - (negative control group)- no filling material.
Each group is divided into two subgroups (a, b) of ten teeth each
1. Retropreparation done with ultrasonic retrotip.
2. Retropreparation done with conventional bur.
The teeth were then immersed in 0.5% Rhodamine B dye for 48
h. The teeth were split longitudinally and the interface between the
restored material and the canal wall is observed under Confocal
laser scanning microscope. Depth of dye penetration was
examined under stereomicroscope.
Results: The statistical analysis was performed by One way
ANOVA, t test. Pair wise comparision was done by Newman –
Keuls multiple post hoc test. The mean values of Dye penetration
for Group Ia (321.23), Group Ib (490.11), Group IIa (1065.14),
Group IIb (1170.96), Group IIIa (1888.90), Group IIIb (2025.35).
The samples prepared with ultrasonic retrotip showed less
microleakage but it is statistically not significant.
Conclusion: MTA showed significantly less microleakage when
compared to Biodentine and light cure GIC and there is no
statistical difference between the ultrasonic retrotip preparation
and conventional bur preparation.
| Reference Key |
mandava2015microleakagejournal
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Mandava, Pragna;Bolla, Nagesh;Thumu, Jayaprakash;Vemuri, Sayesh;Chukka, Sunil; |
| Journal | journal of clinical and diagnostic research |
| Year | 2015 |
| DOI |
DOI not found
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.