Effect of spreader and accessory cane size on density of obturation using conventional or mechanical lateral condensation

被引:7
作者
Gound, TG
Riehm, RJ
Odgaard, EC
Makkawy, H
机构
[1] Univ Nebraska, Coll Dent, Lincoln, NE 68583 USA
[2] Univ Nebraska, Coll Arts & Sci, Lincoln, NE 68583 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1097/00004770-200105000-00013
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
A simulated curved root canal in a resin block was enlarged to size 40 and used to compare the depth of accessory cone penetration and weight of obturation occurring with the use of different obturation techniques and spreader-accessory cone combinations. Twelve groups, each consisting of 10 obturations, were created. A conventional lateral condensation technique was used in six groups and a mechanical lateral condensation (MLC) technique was used in six matched groups. The six spreader-accessory cone combinations were either Fine-Medium or Fine nicker-titanium finger spreaders with either Fine, Medium-Fine, or size 25 accessory cones. Seven accessory cones were placed in every obturation. The depth of each accessory cone penetration into the canal was measured. After each obturation the gutta-percha was removed, sectioned, and the resulting mass was weighed. The means for each variable were determined and compared. MLC fills were significantly heavier and had greater depth of penetration on average than conventional lateral condensation. The best combination for heavy fills was MLC, Fine-Medium spreaders, and Fine accessory cones. The greatest mean accessory cone depth occurred with MLC, Fine-Medium spreaders, and size 25 accessory cones.
引用
收藏
页码:358 / 361
页数:4
相关论文
共 14 条
[1]  
Allison D A, 1981, J Endod, V7, P61, DOI 10.1016/S0099-2399(81)80243-9
[2]   A description of an alternative method of lateral condensation and a comparison of the ability to obturate canals using mechanical or traditional lateral condensation [J].
Gound, TG ;
Riehm, RJ ;
Makkawy, HA ;
Odgaard, EC .
JOURNAL OF ENDODONTICS, 2000, 26 (12) :756-759
[3]  
Gutmann J. L., 1998, PATHWAYS PULP, P258
[4]  
Hall EM, 1930, J AM DENT ASSOC, V17, P88
[5]   EVALUATION OF SIZE VARIATION BETWEEN ENDODONTIC FINGER SPREADERS AND ACCESSORY GUTTA-PERCHA CONES [J].
HARTWELL, GR ;
BARBIERI, SJ ;
GERARD, SE ;
GUNSOLLEY, JC .
JOURNAL OF ENDODONTICS, 1991, 17 (01) :8-11
[6]  
INGLE JI, 1994, ENDODONTICS, P228
[7]   COMPATIBILITY OF ACCESSORY GUTTA-PERCHA CONES USED WITH 2 TYPES OF SPREADERS [J].
JEROME, CE ;
HICKS, ML ;
PELLEU, GB .
JOURNAL OF ENDODONTICS, 1988, 14 (09) :428-434
[8]  
KERRY KA, 1998, J ENDODONT, V24, P752
[9]  
Sakkal S, 1991, Compendium, V12, ppassim
[10]   LEAKAGE AFTER LATERAL CONDENSATION WITH FINGER SPREADERS AND D-11-T SPREADERS [J].
SIMONS, J ;
IBANEZ, B ;
FRIEDMAN, S ;
TROPE, M .
JOURNAL OF ENDODONTICS, 1991, 17 (03) :101-104