A laboratory study comparing the static navigation technique using a bur with a conventional freehand technique using ultrasonic tips for the removal of fibre posts
Author
Abella Sans, Francesc
Tariq Alatiya, Zeena
Gómez Val, Gonzalo
Nagendrababu, Venkateshbabu
Howell Dummer, Paul Michael
Durán Sindreu Terol, Fernando
Gonzalo Olivieri, Juan
Publication date
2024ISSN
0143-2885
Abstract
Aim: There are currently no high-quality studies comparing the static navigation technique with conventional methods of fibre post removal. The aim of this ex vivo study was to compare the effectiveness of fibre post removal between a static navigation technique and a conventional freehand technique using ultrasonics by experienced and inexperienced operators. Methodology: Forty-eight extracted single-rooted human premolars were root-filled. A fibre post was cemented in all 48 teeth, which were then divided randomly into the following groups: static navigation group using burs; static navigation-ultrasonic group; and non-guided group using ultrasonic tips. The following parameters were evaluated for both experienced operators and inexperienced operators: reaching the gutta-percha root filling successfully, the time required to remove the entire post, the occurrence of lateral root perforations, and the amount of root dentine removed. The Kolmogorov–Smirnov test was used to examine the normality of the data; the anova test was used to compare the significant differences among groups; and Tukey tests were used for all two-by-two comparisons. The significance level was set at 0.05. Results: In the static navigation group, the gutta-percha was reached significantly more frequently than in the non-guided group (p < .05). The static navigation approach required significantly less time than the non-guided approach to reach the gutta-percha (p < .05). The total removal of posts was significantly different between groups (p < .05), but there was no significant difference between experienced and inexperienced operators in the static navigation group (p > .05). More perforations were associated with the non-guided group than with the other two groups. The total mean loss of dentine in the non-guided group in all directions was 0.39 (±0.17) mm, with 0.25 (±0.09) mm for experienced, and 0.42 (±0.16) mm for inexperienced operators. Conclusion: When compared to a conventional ultrasonic technique for the removal of fibre posts, the static navigation method using burs resulted in less dentine removal, more rapid access to the gutta-percha root filling, less overall time to remove the posts, and fewer complications. When using static navigation, there was no difference in performance between experienced and inexperienced operators.
Document Type
Article
Document version
Published version
Language
English
Subject (CDU)
616.3 - Pathology of the digestive system. Complaints of the alimentary canal
Keywords
Endodòncia
Post de fibra
Endodòncia guiada
Extirpació posterior
Tractament de conductes radiculars
Tècnica de navegació estàtica
Endodoncia
Poste de fibra
Endodoncia guiada
Extracción de poste
Tratamiento de conducto
Técnica de navegación estática
Endodontics
Fibre post
Guided endodontics
Post removal
Root canal treatment
Static navigation technique
Pages
13
Publisher
Wiley
Collection
57;3
Is part of
International Endodontic Journal
Citation
Abella Sans, Francesc; Tariq Alatiya, Zeena; Gómez Val, Gonzalo [et al.]. A laboratory study comparing the static navigation technique using a bur with a conventional freehand technique using ultrasonic tips for the removal of fibre posts. International Endodontic Journal, 2024, 57(3), p. 355-368. Disponible en: <https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/iej.14017>. Fecha de acceso: 20 feb. 2024. DOI: 10.1111/iej.14017
This item appears in the following Collection(s)
- Odontologia [228]
Rights
© 2024 The Authors. International Endodontic Journal published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Endodontic Society. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/