Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate the ability of dentists to remove composite fillings from endodontic access cavities using illumination from a conventional light source (CLS) versus the fluorescence-aided identification technique (FIT) in terms of completeness, selectivity and treatment duration. Therefore, two independent operators removed composite resin from six sets of root-filled incisors in a maxillary model under simulated clinical conditions using the CLS or FIT method (twelve teeth per operator and technique). The duration of treatment was recorded and before-after micro-CT scans were superimposed for volumetric assessment of treatment completeness and selectivity. Statistical significance was determined by t-testing and two-way ANOVA for operator comparison.Overall, there was no significant difference be- tween FIT and CLS in terms of volume, height and area of composite residues (p = 0.98/p = 0.75/p = 0.64) and regarding hard tissue loss in terms of volume, depth and area (p = 0.93/p = 0.70/p = 0.14). However, there was a significant difference between the two groups regarding treatmenttime(FIT=428s,CLS=523s;p=0.023). Significant differences between operators regard- less of method were found for volume, height and area of composite residues (p < 0.05) and also for defect area (p = 0.01) and time (p < 0.001). A significant difference between operators including the method was only found for height of composites (p = 0.037). It can be concluded, that composite remnants and tooth structure losses may occur after reentry of root-filled teeth regardless of the illumination method (conventional vs. fluorescence- aided) and operator, but preparation was less time-consuming with FIT.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call