首页> 外文期刊>Microscopy research and technique >Comparison of microcomputed tomography, cone beam tomography, stereomicroscopy, and scanning electron microscopy techniques for detection of microcracks on root dentin and effect of different apical sizes on microcrack formation
【24h】

Comparison of microcomputed tomography, cone beam tomography, stereomicroscopy, and scanning electron microscopy techniques for detection of microcracks on root dentin and effect of different apical sizes on microcrack formation

机译:微型断层扫描,锥形束断层扫描,立体镜检查和扫描电子显微镜技术的比较检测根牙本质的微裂纹及不同顶端尺寸对微裂纹形成的影响

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The aim of the study was to compare different imaging methods in the diagnosis of microcracks on root dentin and to evaluate the frequency of dentinal microcracks observed after root canal preparation using the ProTaper Universal (PTU) system of different sizes. A total of 30 mandibular molars' mesial roots were scanned with microcomputed tomography (micro-CT) and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging methods before instrumentation. Root canal instrumentation was performed up to PTU F2 and F4 files. After instrumentation stages, the roots were scanned again with micro-CT and then with CBCT in same parameters. All roots were sectioned horizontally at 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10 mm from the apices of the specimens. The sections were imaged under a stereomicroscope. Finally, imaging of the sections was done by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Statistical data analysis of instrumentation steps was performed using Friedman and Wilcoxon tests, and the data of imaging methods were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests (p = .05). Instrumentation with the PTU system up to F2 and F4 files significantly increased the number of microcracks compared with preoperative samples according to micro-CT imaging (p < .05). For detecting microcracks on the root dentin, there were no statistically significant differences between micro-CT (43.9%) and stereomicroscopy (45.8%) (p < .05). SEM showed significantly higher percentage of microcracks (88.3%) (p > .05). No microcrack was observed using the CBCT method. There were no statistically differences between micro-CT and stereomicroscopy. SEM showed more dentinal microcracks while no microcrack was observed with CBCT.
机译:该研究的目的是比较不同的成像方法在根牙本质的微裂纹中的诊断中,并使用不同尺寸的蛋白通用(PTU)系统评估根管制备后观察到的牙本质微裂纹的频率。在仪器之前,使用微型断层扫描(Micro-CT)和锥形光束计算机断层扫描(CBCT)成像方法扫描了总共30个下颌臼齿的薄层。根管仪器仪表由PTU F2和F4文件执行。在仪表阶段之后,用微型CT再次扫描根,然后在相同的参数中进行CBCT。所有根部均在2,4,6,8和10mm的分散型水平分离。这些部分在立体显微镜下成像。最后,通过扫描电子显微镜(SEM)来完成部分的成像。使用Friedman和Wilcoxon测试进行仪器处理步骤的统计数据分析,并使用Kruskal-Wallis和Mann-Whitney U测试分析成像方法的数据(P = .05)。与根据微CT成像的术前样品相比,使用高达F2和F4文件的PTU系统的仪器显着增加了微裂纹的数量(P <.05)。用于检测根牙本质上的微裂纹,微型CT(43.9%)和立体镜检查(45.8%)之间没有统计学上显着的差异(P <.05)。 SEM显示出显着较高的微裂纹(88.3%)(p> .05)。使用CBCT方法观察到没有微裂纹。微型CT和立体镜检查没有统计学差异。 SEM显示出更多的牙本质微裂纹,而CBCT没有观察到微裂纹。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号