Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics

  • 제32권6호
  • /
  • Pages.550-558
  • /
  • 2007
  • /
  • 2234-7658(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2234-7666(eISSN)
대한치과보존학회 (The Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

레진모형 근관에서 Ni-Ti 파일로 근관성형 후 거타퍼챠콘의 근관내 삽입깊이에 대한 연구

A STUDY OF INSERTION DEPTH OF GUTTA PERCHA CONES AFTER SHAPING BY NI-TI ROTARY FILES IN SIMULATED CANALS

  • 조현구 (전남대학교 치의학 전문대학원 보존학교실, 치의학 연구소, 2단계 BK21 사업단) ;
  • 황윤찬 (전남대학교 치의학 전문대학원 보존학교실, 치의학 연구소, 2단계 BK21 사업단) ;
  • 황인남 (전남대학교 치의학 전문대학원 보존학교실, 치의학 연구소, 2단계 BK21 사업단) ;
  • 오원만 (전남대학교 치의학 전문대학원 보존학교실, 치의학 연구소, 2단계 BK21 사업단)
  • Cho, Hyun-Gu (Dept. of Conservative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, DSRI, 2nd stage of BK21, Chonnam National University) ;
  • Hwang, Yun-Chan (Dept. of Conservative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, DSRI, 2nd stage of BK21, Chonnam National University) ;
  • Hwang, In-Nam (Dept. of Conservative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, DSRI, 2nd stage of BK21, Chonnam National University) ;
  • Oh, Won-Mann (Dept. of Conservative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, DSRI, 2nd stage of BK21, Chonnam National University)
  • 발행 : 2007.11.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

본 연구는 레진모형 만곡근관에서 여러 가지 엔진구동형 Ni-Ti 파일로 근관성형 후, 같은 경사도를 가진 수종의 거타퍼챠콘을 적용시 근관내 삽입깊이에 대해 비교, 분석해보고자 시행하였다. 레진 모형근관으로 J자의 근관형태가 재현된 ENDO-TRAINING BLOCK 50개를 사용하여 각각 10개씩 1) ProFile .04 taper #25, 2) ProFile .06 taper #25, 3) ProTaper F2, 4) HEROShaper .04 taper #25, 5) HEROShaper .06 taper #25 파일로 최종 근관성형 하였다. 거타퍼챠콘은 META (META Biomed, Korea), Sure-Endo(SUREDENT, Korea) 그리고 DiaDent(DiaDent Group International Inc., Canada)의 .04 및 .06 경사도의 콘을 사용하였으며 선택된 거타퍼챠콘의 직경 및 경사도를 측정하였다. ProFile과 HEROShaper로 성형한 레진블록에는사용된 Ni-Ti 파일의 경사도에 맞는 제조회사별 .04및 .06경사도의 거타퍼챠콘을 10개씩 근관에 적용하였으며, ProTaper로 성형한 레진블록에는 경사도와 무관하게 제조회사별 .04 및 .06 경사도의 거타퍼챠콘을 10개씩 적용하였다. 거타퍼챠콘을 근관내 적용한 상태에서 스캐너를 이용하여 이미지를 얻은 후 이미지 분석 프로그램을 사용하여 근첨에서 거타퍼챠콘 첨부까지의 거리를 측정하였고 다음의 결과를 얻었다. HEROShaper를 이용하여 근관성형 한 경우 ProFile 및 ProTaper보다 거타퍼챠콘의 근관내 적합성이 우수하게 나타났으며, 근관성형시 .04 taper HEROShaper로 근관성형 후에는 META 거타퍼챠콘 및 Sure-Endo 거타퍼챠콘을, .06 taper HEROShaper로 근관성형 후에는 DiaDent 거타퍼챠콘을 마스터콘으로 사용시 근관내 적합성이 우수하게 나타났다. 따라서 근관성형 후 사용한 Ni-Ti 파일과 같은 경사도를 가진 거타퍼챠콘이 근관에 알맞게 위치되는 것은 아니며 근관충전시 적절한 마스터콘의 선택이 필요함을 시사한다.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the insertion depth of several brands of master gutta percha cones after shaping by various Ni-Ti rotary files in simulated canals. Fifty resin simulated J-shape canals were instrumented with ProFile, ProTaper and HEROShaper. Simulated canals were prepared with ProFile .04 taper #25(n=10), .06 taper #25(n=10), ProTaper F2(n=10), HEROShaper .04 taper #25(n=10) and .06 taper #25(n=10). Size #25 gutta percha cones with a .04 & .06 taper from three different brands were used: DiaDent; META; Sure-endo. The gutta percha cones were selected and inserted into the prepared simulated canals. The distance from the apex of the prepared canal to the gutta percha cone tip was measured by image analysis program. Within limited data of this study, the results were as follows 1. When the simulated root canals were prepared with HEROShaper, gutta-percha cones were closely adapted to the root canal. 2. All brands of gutta percha cones fail to go to the prepared length in canal which was instrumented with ProFile, the cones extend beyond the prepared length in canal which was prepared with ProTaper. 3. In canal which was instrumented with HEROShaper .04 taper #25, Sure-endo .04 taper master gutta percha cone was well fitted(p < 0.05). 4. In canal which was instrumented with HEROShaper .06 taper #25, META .06 taper master gutta percha cone was well fitted(p < 0.05). As a result, we concluded that the insertion depth of all brands of master gutta percha cone do not match the rotary instrument, even though it was prepared by crown-down technique, as recommended by the manufacturer. Therefore, the master cone should be carefully selected to match the depth of the prepared canal for adequate obturation.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Gutmann JL. Johnson WT. Obturation of the cleaned and shaped root canal system. In: Cohen S, Hagreaves KM. Pathways of the pulp. 9th ed, Mosby, St Louis. p358-399. 2006
  2. Kratchman SI. Obturation of the root canal system. Dent Clin North Am 48:203-215, 2004 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cden.2003.12.004
  3. Hsu YY, Kim S. The ProFile system. Dent Clin North Am 48:69-85, 2004 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cden.2003.11.006
  4. Thomas C. Baumann MA. ProTaper NT system. Dent Clin North Am 48:87-111, 2004 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cden.2003.10.006
  5. Veltri M, Mollo A. A comparative study of Endoflare-HeroShaper and Mtwo NiTi instruments in the preparation of curved root canal. Int Endod J 38:610-616, 2005 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2005.00989.x
  6. Gordon MPJ. Love RM. An evaluation of .06 tapered gutta-percha cones for filling of .06 taper prepared curved root canals. Int Endod J 38:87-96, 2005 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2004.00903.x
  7. Bal AS, Hicks ML. Comparison of laterally condensed .06 and .02 tapered gutta-percha and sealer in vitro. J Endod 27:786-788. 2001 https://doi.org/10.1097/00004770-200112000-00019
  8. Hembrough MW. Steiman R. Lateral condensation in canals prepared with NiTi rotary instruments: An evaluation of the use of three different master cone. J Endod 28:516-519. 2002 https://doi.org/10.1097/00004770-200207000-00007
  9. Calberson FLG, Deroose CAJG, Hommez GMG. Raes H. De Moor RJG. Shaping ability of GTTM rotary files in simulated resin root canals. Int Endod J 35:607-614, 2002 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2591.2002.00540.x
  10. Eldeeb ME, Boraas JC. The effect of different files on the preparation shape of severely curved canals. Int Endod J 18:1-7, 1985 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.1985.tb00414.x
  11. Kum KY. Spangberg L, Cha BY, Jung IY, Lee SJ, Lee CY. Shaping ability of three ProFile rotary instrumentation techniques in simulated resin root canals. J Endod 26:719-723, 2000 https://doi.org/10.1097/00004770-200012000-00013
  12. Dummer PMH. Alodeh MHA. A method for the construction of simulated root canals in clear resin blocks. Int Endod J 24:63-66. 1991 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.1991.tb00809.x
  13. Thompson SA. Dummer PMH. Shaping ability of ProFile .04 taper series 29 rotary nickel-titanium instruments in simulated root canals. Part 1. Int Endod J 30:1-7. 1997 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.1997.tb01093.x
  14. Kazemi R, Stennman E, Spangberg LS. Machining efficiency and wear resistance of nickel-titanium endodontic files. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 81: 596-602, 1996 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1079-2104(96)80055-2
  15. Yang GB. Zhou XD. Shaping ability of progressive versus constant taper instrumentations in simulated root canals. Int Endod J 39:791-799. 2006 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2006.01151.x
  16. Bergmans L. Cleynenbreugel JV. Progressive versus constant tapered shaft design using NiTi rotary instruments. Int Endod J 36:288-295. 2003 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2591.2003.00650.x
  17. 권오상, 김성교. 전동화일로 형성된 근관에서 비표준화 Gutta-percha Cone의 적합성. 대한치과보존학희지 25: 390-398, 2000