Premium
Root‐end cavity preparation using the MicroMega Sonic Retro‐prep Tip™. SEM analysis
Author(s) -
LLOYD A.,
JAUNBERZINS A.,
DUMMER P. M. H.,
BRYANT S.
Publication year - 1996
Publication title -
international endodontic journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.988
H-Index - 119
eISSN - 1365-2591
pISSN - 0143-2885
DOI - 10.1111/j.1365-2591.1996.tb01388.x
Subject(s) - bevel , root canal , dentistry , magnification , materials science , long axis , molar , orthodontics , medicine , mathematics , physics , geometry , optics , structural engineering , engineering
Summary The objective of this laboratory study was to compare root‐end cavities prepared with sonic Retro‐prep tips in a MM 1500 Sonic Air handpiece with those created by burs in a conventional handpiece. A total of 80 single‐rooted extracted human teeth with mature apices and straight canals were included in the study. Four groups of 20 extracted teeth were prepared as follows: I, a 3‐4 mm root‐end resection perpendicular to the long axis of the root, with a size 40 sonic Retro‐prep tip creating an apical cavity 3 mm into root canal system; II, a 45° bevel of the root‐face removing a 3‐4 mm root segment and root‐end preparation as per group I; III, root‐end resection as per group I, with an apical cavity prepared using a size 010 inverted cone bur 3 mm down the long axis of the root; IV, resection as per group II, followed by an apical cavity preparation with a size 010 inverted cone bur 3 mm into the root canal system. The apical root portion and root‐end cavities were replicated and prepared for SEM analysis at × 20 and × 80 magnification. The degree of chipping associated with the margin of the root‐end cavities, as evaluated with a standard grading system, and the incidence of root‐face cracks were noted. Marginal chipping of root‐end cavities prepared using sonic instrumentation was significantly worse than that produced by burs (P<0.001). Perpendicular root‐end resections showed significantly better scores than bevelled root‐end resections (P<0.005). The incidence of root‐face cracking was low with no significant difference between the experimental groups.