RESUMO
The loss of periodontal tissue support and vertical buccal bone loss in apico-marginal defects can often be mistaken for features indicative of vertical root fractures and this study reports thirteen cases with persistent symptomatic apical periodontitis, apico-marginal defects, and large periapical lesions that were managed with endodontic microsurgery in conjunction with bone grafts and barrier placements with a follow-up period of up to 9 years. At the recall sessions, all cases were asymptomatic with radiographical success with only 2 cases exhibiting residual apical radiolucency, but with evident reduction in the lesion size, indicative of healing. This study highlights the potential of utilizing endodontic microsurgery combined with guided tissue regeneration that proved effective in stimulating the regeneration of periodontal tissue in cases of apico-marginal defects that can lead to favourable long-term outcomes.
Assuntos
Microcirurgia , Periodontite Periapical , Humanos , Regeneração Tecidual Guiada Periodontal , Periodontite Periapical/diagnóstico por imagem , Periodontite Periapical/cirurgia , Cicatrização , PeriodontoRESUMO
AIM: To compare two flat-side single-file rotary instruments with three single-file reciprocating systems through a multimethod assessment. METHODOLOGY: A total of 290 new NiTi single-file rotary (AF F One Blue 25/0.06 and Platinum V.EU 25/0.06) and reciprocating (One Files Blue R25, Reciproc Blue R25, Reciproc R25) instruments were selected, carefully examined for any major deformations, and evaluated regarding their macroscopic and microscopic design, nickel and titanium elements ratio, phase transformation temperatures, and mechanical performance (time/rotation to fracture, maximum torque, angle of rotation, microhardness, maximum bending, and buckling strengths). One-way anova post hoc Tukey, T-test, and nonparametric Mood's median tests were used for statistical comparisons (α = 5%). RESULTS: Tested instruments had identical blade counts and near-identical helical angles of approximately 24° (rotary instruments) and 151° (reciprocating instruments). The flat-side analysis revealed a few inconsistencies, such as discontinuity segments, different orientations, and gaps in the homogeneity of the bluish colour. Microscopically, flat-side instruments exhibited blade discontinuity and an incomplete S-shaped cross-section. The surface finish was smoother for One Files Blue and more irregular for both rotary instruments. There were distinct phase transformation temperatures amongst all instruments. All heat-treated instruments were in R-phase arrangement, and Reciproc was in R-phase plus austenite at test temperature (20°C). Compared with the reciprocating instruments, both flat-side instruments exhibited lower results in the cyclic fatigue tests using two different clockwise kinematics, maximum torque, angle of rotation, and maximum buckling strength (p < .05). The rotary systems also exhibited low flexibility (p < .05). AF F One Blue had the lowest microhardness, whilst Reciproc had the highest value. CONCLUSION: This multimethod investigation revealed that the flat-side rotary instruments underperformed the reciprocating instruments regarding cyclic fatigue (with two different clockwise kinematics), maximum torque, angle of rotation, maximum buckling strength, and flexibility. Manufacturing inconsistencies were also observed in some of the flat-side instruments, including discontinuity segments, different orientations, and in the homogeneity of their bluish colour given by the heat treatment.
Assuntos
Instrumentos Odontológicos , Temperatura Alta , Desenho de Equipamento , Preparo de Canal Radicular , Teste de Materiais , Titânio , Estresse MecânicoRESUMO
AIM: To describe the prevalence of periapical lesions, root canal treatments and coronal restorations on teeth adjacent to either implant- or natural tooth-supported crowns using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) assessment compared to nonadjacent teeth. METHODOLOGY: A total of 1249 CBCT volumes were screened by five pre-calibrated observers in 11 health centres. A step-by-step screening protocol was implemented and reviewed every 3 months, and mandatory setting characteristics were established for all CBCT scans using dedicated visualization software. Intra- and inter-rater reliability tests were conducted. The prevalence of periapical lesions, root canal treatments and coronal restorations was recorded on both teeth adjacent and nonadjacent to implant- (predictor 1) or natural tooth-supported crowns (predictor 2). A binary logistic model (Generalizing Estimating Equations test) was used to verify whether the prevalence of periapical lesion, root canal filling and the tooth restorative status are altered when the assessed tooth is adjacent or not to an implant-supported crown (predictor 1); or to a natural tooth-supported crown (predictor 2). Odds ratio and confidence intervals for the dependent variables at both predictors were obtained. The significance level was set at .05. RESULTS: A global sample of 22 899 teeth was included. Compared to nonadjacent teeth, the prevalence of periapical lesion, root canals treatments and restorative procedures when adjacent to implant-supported crowns was 10.7%, 19.6% and 22.9% higher, respectively, and when adjacent to tooth-supported crowns was 19.3%, 35.6% and 37.4% higher respectively. These results were significant only for variables root canal filling and coronal restoration (p < .0001). Odds ratio to present root canal treatment is 2.57 times higher (CI 1.95-3.39, p = .0001) when the tooth is adjacent to implant-supported crown and 4.39 times (CI 3.49-5.53, p = .0001) when adjacent to tooth-supported crown, whilst for restorative procedure, the odds are, respectively, 1.63 (CI 1.29-2.06, p = .0001) and 2.30 (CI 1.92-2.76, p = .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Teeth adjacent to both implant- and natural tooth-supported crowns were associated with a higher frequency of root canal filling and coronal restorations.