Display options
Share it on

J Clin Exp Dent. 2017 Jun 01;9(6):e762-e766. doi: 10.4317/jced.53818. eCollection 2017 Jun.

Efficacy of three methods for inserting calcium hydroxide-based paste in root canals.

Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry

Thales Galvão, Bernardo Camargo, Luciana Armada, Flávio Alves

Affiliations

  1. MSc, Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Estácio de Sá University, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.
  2. PhD, Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Estácio de Sá University, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.

PMID: 28638552 PMCID: PMC5474331 DOI: 10.4317/jced.53818

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To compare the quality of calcium hydroxide paste fillings performed by three different techniques.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sixty extracted maxillary central incisors, with previous root canal treatment, were decoronated and the gutta-percha was completely removed from the root canals. Subsequently, the canals were filled with a calcium hydroxide-based paste composed of calcium hydroxide, bismuth carbonate, and glycerin. The study samples were divided into the following three groups on the basis of three insertion techniques (n = 20, each): conventional technique using a hand instrument (MAN), rotary Lentulo spiral (LEN) technique, and a combined technique combining conventional hand files with sonic activation through the EndoActivator device (EA). The quality of fillings was evaluated radiographically by two examiners on the basis of the amount of voids and the apical limit.

RESULTS: The canals filled with LEN or MAN had less void volume compared to the EA technique (

CONCLUSIONS: A combined approach utilizing hand files with sonic activation showed no enhancements over the LEN or MAN techniques on the quality of intracanal placement of calcium hydroxide paste.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of interest statement:The authors deny any conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Endod Dent Traumatol. 1997 Jun;13(3):106-12 - PubMed
  2. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2000 Mar;89(3):349-55 - PubMed
  3. J Conserv Dent. 2013 Jul;16(4):294-9 - PubMed
  4. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2011 Dec;112(6):825-42 - PubMed
  5. Int Endod J. 2005 Dec;38(12 ):889-95 - PubMed
  6. J Endod. 2016 Jan;42(1):89-94 - PubMed
  7. Dent Today. 2009 Nov;28(11):82, 84 - PubMed
  8. Braz Dent J. 2007;18(4):299-304 - PubMed
  9. J Endod. 1992 Aug;18(8):367-70 - PubMed
  10. Int Endod J. 2011 Aug;44(8):697-730 - PubMed
  11. J Endod. 2006 Jul;32(7):680-2 - PubMed
  12. Braz Dent J. 2002;13(1):53-6 - PubMed
  13. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 1985 Jul-Aug;6(7):482-3, 486, 488-9 - PubMed
  14. J Endod. 2003 Feb;29(2):121-4 - PubMed
  15. Int Endod J. 1999 Sep;32(5):361-9 - PubMed
  16. Aust Endod J. 2011 Dec;37(3):92-8 - PubMed
  17. J Endod. 2004 Apr;30(4):225-7 - PubMed
  18. J Endod. 2012 Aug;38(8):1040-52 - PubMed
  19. J Appl Oral Sci. 2006 Jun;14(3):219-23 - PubMed
  20. BMC Oral Health. 2013 Oct 07;13:52 - PubMed
  21. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2002 Jul;94(1):93-7 - PubMed
  22. J Endod. 2011 Sep;37(9):1268-71 - PubMed

Publication Types