论文部分内容阅读
目的:利用树脂模拟根管比较机用ProTaper Next、ProTaper Universal、K3XF、Twisted File和Hyflex CM在弯曲根管内的成形能力。方法:使用机用ProTaper Next、ProTaper Universal、K3XF、TwistedFile和Hyflex CM预备五组模拟树脂根管,预备过程中记录器械变形及分离的发生,预备完成后测量预备前后根管中轴线的变化。结果:根管中轴线的变化量:在根尖部和根中部,K3XF、Twisted File和HyflexCM三组均少于ProTaper Next和ProTaper Universal组(P<0.05);在根中部,ProTaper Next组小于ProTaper Universal组(P<0.05);在根冠部,Hyflex CM组小于其他各组(P<0.05)。结论:ProTaper Next、K3XF、Twisted File(TF)和Hyflex CM在预备弯曲根管时,均能够较好地维持根管原始走向,防止根尖偏移,是较理想的弯曲根管预备器械。
OBJECTIVE: To characterize the ability of ProTaper Next, ProTaper Universal, K3XF, Twisted File, and Hyflex CM to be used in curved root canals by means of resin simulation. Methods: Five groups of simulated resin root canals were prepared with ProTaper Next, ProTaper Universal, K3XF, TwistedFile and Hyflex CM respectively. During the preparation, instrument deformation and separation were recorded. After preparation, the changes of the root canal before and after preparation were measured. Results: Changes in central axis of root canal: K3XF, Twisted File and HyflexCM were less than those in ProTaper Next and ProTaper Universal groups (P <0.05) at root and middle of root; in ProTaper Next group was less than that of ProTaper (P <0.05). In the root and crown, the Hyflex CM group was smaller than the other groups (P <0.05). CONCLUSIONS: ProTaper Next, K3XF, Twisted File (TF) and Hyflex CM are better candidates for curved root canal preparation because they are able to maintain the original root canal orientation and prevent the tip from deviating.