| Autor: |
Cohen, Stephen, Caro, Alicia, Mahn, Gustavo, Allareddy, Veerasathpurush, Allareddy, Veeratrishul |
| Předmět: |
|
| Zdroj: |
Journal of the California Dental Association; Jan2021, Vol. 49 Issue 1, p35-42, 8p |
| Abstrakt: |
Background: A clinical trial was designed to evaluate bone regeneration in patients who received one of three retrosealants after apicoectomies in teeth with periapical lesions of endodontic origin to determine which is the best. Methods: Three retrosealants (EndoSequence, ProRoot MTA, Biodentine) were used following microsurgical apicoectomies in a prospective comparative randomized clinical trial in 74 patients who were selected from the endodontics department at the Universidad de Valparaiso, Chile. Clinical and CBCT evaluations were performed up to six months following the procedure. Results: There were no significant statistical differences in the bone regeneration among the three groups. The distribution of outcome was examined by the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test for normality. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to examine differences among the three groups and pairwise comparisons were conducted by using Mann-Whitney tests. Conclusions: There were no significant differences in the healing of the periapical bone lesion between the three materials used in this investigation. Other studies with a larger number of cases and a longer follow-up time are recommended. Practical implications: Based on the results of this study, the clinician can choose any of the three retrofilling cements to seal the canals after an apicectomy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Databáze: |
Complementary Index |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
