Your browser doesn't support javascript.
A Biblioteca Cochrane foi excluída da BVS por decisão da Wiley de não renovação da licença de uso com a BIREME. Saiba mais.

BVS Odontologia

Informação e Conhecimento para a Saúde

Home > Pesquisa > ()
Imprimir Exportar

Formato de exportação:

Exportar

Email
Adicionar mais destinatários
| |

Comparative evaluation of the enamel margins roughness obtained with different finishing devices.

Scotti, N; Bregola, A; Chiandussi, G; Paolino, D; Pasqualini, D; Berutti, E.
Minerva Stomatol; 61(1-2): 1-9, 2012.
Artigo em Inglês, Italiano | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22274305

AIM:

The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the surface roughness of enamel margins resulting by the use of rotating, sonic and ultrasonic devices for cavity margins finishing.

METHODS:

Forty-eight anterior intact teeth were selected for this study. Each item was sectioned 1 mm below the CEJ, perpendicular to the long axis of the tooth, with the carborundum separating disk mounted on the high-speed handpiece. With the same bur the crown was separated into two parts along the midline vertically. At the end 96 "half-crowns" were obtained. The samples were divided into 6 groups of 8 samples each, according to enamel margin's finishing technique (A and B diamond ultrasonic tip; C multisteel ultrasonic tip; D fine diamond rotating bur; E ultra-fine diamond rotating bur; F sonicflex prep). The surface roughness evaluation of the enamel of each sample has been carried out by using a profilometer. The statistical analysis was performed with a balanced hierarchical ANOVA. RESULTS AND

CONCLUSION:

The results of this in vitro study showed that the enamel roughness obtained with sonic and ultrasonic devices was significantly higher than roughness obtained with rotating burs. Within the sonic and ultrasonic tips, the multisteel ones gave better results, that were comparable to diamond sonic device.