Influence of access cavity design on instrumentation efficiency in 3D-printed replicas of mandibular incisors with Vertucci Type III canals

髓腔入口设计对具有Vertucci III型根管的下颌切牙3D打印模型器械操作效率的影响

阅读:4

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To assess the impact of access cavity design on instrumentation effectiveness in three-dimensional (3D)-printed mandibular incisors with Vertucci Type III canal configuration. METHODS: Two extracted mandibular incisors with Vertucci Type III anatomy, which presented contrasting morphologies (a spacious canal system with isthmuses in Specimen 1 versus a restricted morphology without in Specimen 2), were replicated via 3D printing. This process yielded 48 resin replicas per specimen (total n = 96), evenly distributed into six groups (n = 8 per group). Each group underwent instrumentation with either WaveOne Gold (WOG) or ProTaper Next (PTN) nickel-titanium (NiTi) systems via one of three access approaches: traditional lingual (TLAC), incisal ridge (IAC), or labial (LaAC). Pre- and post-instrumentation micro-computed tomographic scans were analyzed for iatrogenic errors, canal volume/surface area changes, unprepared areas, and apical diameter. Data were statistically evaluated using three-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with LSD post hoc test, with the significance level set at p < 0.05. RESULTS: Canal straightening occurred only in the LaAC and IAC groups (9 cases each), whereas apical perforations (22 cases) were exclusive to Specimen 2 replicas. Three-way ANOVA revealed that percentage increases in canal volume and surface area, proportion of unprepared area, and maximum apical diameter following instrumentation were all significantly affected by tooth prototype (all p < 0.001), accessing cavity design (all p < 0.01), and the instrument used (all p < 0.01). In Specimen 1 replicas (spacious canals), PTN with TLAC resulted in a lower proportion of unprepared areas than PTN with LaAC (36.7% ± 8.9% vs. 47.6% ± 7.8%; p < 0.05); however, both techniques preparing only one canal. In contrast, PTN with IAC prepared both canals and achieved the most complete preparation (18.8% ± 3.2% unprepared, p < 0.05). The use of WOG significantly improved outcomes in the LaAC group, reducing unprepared areas to 13.9% ± 4.8% (p < 0.05). Similar trends emerged in Specimen 2 replicas, though the narrower anatomy increased procedural difficulty. WOG consistently outperformed PTN: IAC prepared both canals in all cases (8/8), while LaAC succeeded in 87.5% (7/8). Unprepared surfaces were significantly lower with IAC (8.0% ± 5.5%) and LaAC (9.3% ± 8.2%) than with TLAC (34.2% ± 5.1%; both p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: IAC demonstrated superior efficacy for instrumentation of mandibular incisors with Vertucci Type III canals compared to TLAC and LaAC. WOG enhanced LaAC performance and surpassed PTN overall. Access design and instrument selection critically influence procedural success.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。