3种根管封闭剂充填效果的Micro-CT评估

doi:10.7518/hxkq.2025.2025009

华西口腔医学杂志 ›› 2025, Vol. 43 ›› Issue (5): 722-727.doi: 10.7518/hxkq.2025.2025009

3种根管封闭剂充填效果的Micro-CT评估

黄日鸿¹(), 曾祥倪¹^,², 蒋丽¹^,², 张立霞¹^,², 朱静雅¹^,³, 何飞¹()

^1.深圳市人民医院（暨南大学第二临床医学院，南方科技大学第一附属医院）口腔科，深圳 518020
^2.暨南大学口腔医学院，广州 510632
^3.深圳市第三人民医院（南方科技大学第二附属医院）口腔科，深圳 518112

收稿日期:2025-01-06 修回日期:2025-02-19 出版日期:2025-10-01 发布日期:2025-10-21
通讯作者: 何飞 E-mail:bryanhuang17@163.com;hefeixqkq@aliyun.com
作者简介:黄日鸿，住院医师，硕士，E-mail：bryanhuang17@163.com
基金资助:
深圳市自然科学基金(JCYJ20210324114005016);深圳市自然科学基金(JCY-J20180228164611173)

Evaluation of the filling effects of three root-canal sealers by Micro-CT

Huang Rihong¹(), Zeng Xiangni¹^,², Jiang Li¹^,², Zhang Lixia¹^,², Zhu Jingya¹^,³, He Fei¹()

^1.Dept. of Stomatology, Shenzhen People’s Hospital (The Second Clinical Medical College, Jinan University; The First Affiliated Hospital, Southern University of Science and Technology), Shenzhen 518020, China
^2.School of Stomatology, Jinan University, Guangzhou 510632, China
^3.Dept. of Stomatology, The Third People’s Hospital of Shenzhen (The Second Affiliated Hospital, Southern University of Science and Technology), Shenzhen 518112, China

Received:2025-01-06 Revised:2025-02-19 Online:2025-10-01 Published:2025-10-21
Contact: He Fei E-mail:bryanhuang17@163.com;hefeixqkq@aliyun.com
Supported by:
Shenzhen Natural Science Foundation(JCYJ20210324114005016)

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的应用Micro-CT评价3种生物材料根管封闭剂iRoot SP、C-Root SP及GuttaFlow Bioseal（GFB）的根管充填效果。方法选取60颗单根单管离体前磨牙，截冠使工作长度统一为12 mm，机用镍钛根管预备至30号06锥度。样本随机分成6组，使用3种根管封闭剂、2种充填法进行根管充填，分别为iRoot SP+单尖法充填、C-Root SP+单尖法充填、GFB+单尖法充填、iRoot SP+超声活化单尖法充填、C-Root SP+超声活化单尖法充填、GFB+超声活化单尖法充填。对充填样本进行Micro-CT扫描，Mimics 22.0软件进行根管系统三维重建，计算根管整体充填率及根冠1/3、根中1/3、根尖1/3的分段充填率。结果 3种根管封闭剂的整体充填率均大于90%。单尖法根管充填时，GFB的根管整体充填率、根冠1/3及根中1/3段充填率均低于iRoot SP、C-Root SP（P<0.01），iRoot SP与C-Root SP充填率间的差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）。超声活化单尖法根管充填时，GFB的根管整体充填率及各段充填率均低于iRoot SP、C-Root SP（P<0.01），iRoot SP与C-Root SP充填率间的差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）。2种充填方法对比，除C-Root SP单尖法充填时根尖1/3充填率低于超声活化单尖法（P<0.01），GFB单尖法充填时根冠1/3充填率高于超声活化单尖法（P<0.01）外，其余充填率间的差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）。结论 3种生物材料根管封闭剂使用单尖法及超声活化单尖法充填根管的整体充填率良好，其中iRoot SP与C-Root SP的充填效果相似，相比GFB具有更好的充填质量。C-Root SP配合超声活化单尖法能提高根尖段充填率。

关键词: 根管充填, 根管封闭剂, iRoot SP, C-Root SP, GuttaFlow Bioseal, Micro-CT

Abstract:

Objective This study aimed to evaluate the filling effects of three biomaterial root-canal sealers [iRoot SP, C-Root SP, and GuttaFlow Bioseal (GFB)] by using Micro-CT. Methods Sixty single-canal detached premolars were selected. After crown amputation, their uniform working length was set at 12 mm and prepared to a 06 taper 30# with M3 nickel-titanium file. The samples were randomly divided into six groups with different sealers and obturation techniques: iRoot SP+single-cone technique (SC), C-Root SP+SC, GFB+SC, iRoot SP+single cone-mediated ultrasonic technique (SU), C-Root SP+SU, and GFB+SU. Samples were scanned by Micro-CT, and the total and segmented filling rates were calculated with Mimics 22.0 software after 3D reconstruction. Results The overall filling rate of the three biomaterial root canal sealers was higher than 90%. The overall and coronal third and middle third segment filling rate of groups iRoot SP+SC, C-Root SP+SC was higher than that of group GFB+SC (P<0.01), with no significant difference between groups iRoot SP+SC and C-Root SP+SC (P>0.05). On the apical third, no significant difference was found among each group (P>0.05). The overall and segment filling rate of groups iRoot SP+SU and C-Root SP+SU was higher than that of GFB+SU (P<0.01), with no significant difference between groups iRoot SP+SU and C-Root SP+SU (P>0.05). The filling rate of the apical 1/3 of group C-Root+SC was lower than that of group C-Root+SU (P<0.01), and the filling rate of the coronal 1/3 of group GFB+SC was higher than that in the GFB+SU (P<0.01). Nevertheless, no significant difference was found in other filling rate of two obturation techniques (P>0.05). Conclusion The overall filling rate of the three biomaterial root-canal sealers using SC and SU are satisfactory. iRoot SP and C-Root SP have similar filling rates, which are significantly higher than that of GFB. C-Root SP combined with SU technique can improve the filling quality of the root apical.

Key words: root canal obturation, root canal sealer, iRoot SP, C-Root SP, GuttaFlow Bioseal, Micro-CT

中图分类号:

R781.05

黄日鸿, 曾祥倪, 蒋丽, 张立霞, 朱静雅, 何飞. 3种根管封闭剂充填效果的Micro-CT评估[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2025, 43(5): 722-727.

Huang Rihong, Zeng Xiangni, Jiang Li, Zhang Lixia, Zhu Jingya, He Fei. Evaluation of the filling effects of three root-canal sealers by Micro-CT[J]. West China Journal of Stomatology, 2025, 43(5): 722-727.

图/表 8

图 1

图2

图 3

图 4

表 1

表 2

图 5

表 3

参考文献 17

[1]	Keleş A, Keskin C. Presence of voids after warm ver-tical compaction and single-cone obturation in band-shaped isthmuses using Micro-computed tomography: a phantom study[J]. Microsc Res Tech, 2020, 83(4): 370-374.
[2]	张琛. 根管充填的难点和误区[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2017, 35(3): 232-238.
	Zhang C. Difficulties and misunderstandings of root canal filling[J]. West China J Stomatol, 2017, 35(3): 232-238.
[3]	Kim JA, Hwang YC, Rosa V, et al. Root canal filling quality of a premixed calcium silicate endodontic sealer applied using gutta-percha cone-mediated ultrasonic activation[J]. J Endod, 2018, 44(1): 133-138.
[4]	Moinzadeh AT, Zerbst W, Boutsioukis C, et al. Porosi-ty distribution in root canals filled with gutta percha and calcium silicate cement[J]. Dent Mater, 2015, 31(9): 1100-1108.
[5]	Rodríguez-Lozano FJ, García-Bernal D, Oñate-Sánchez RE, et al. Evaluation of cytocompatibility of calcium si-licate-based endodontic sealers and their effects on the biological responses of mesenchymal dental stem cells[J]. Int Endod J, 2017, 50(1): 67-76.
[6]	Jing Y, Gong T, Duan CG, et al. In vitro cytocompatibility and osteogenic potential of calcium silicate-based dental cements in a root canal-filling model[J]. J Int Med Res, 2020, 48(4): 300060519894801.
[7]	Deniz Sungur D, Moinzadeh AT, Wesselink PR, et al. Sealing efficacy of a single-cone root filling after post space preparation[J]. Clin Oral Invest, 2016, 20(5): 1071-1077.
[8]	Shen I, Daniel J, Vo K, et al. Use of Micro-CT to exa-mine effects of heat on coronal obturation[J]. J Oral Sci, 2022, 64(3): 224-227.
[9]	Mavishna MV, Venkatesh KV. Comparative evaluation of retreatability of calcium silicate-based root canal sea-lers and epoxy resin-based root canal sealers in curved canals—an in-vitro Micro-CT analysis[J]. Indian J Dent Res, 2021, 32(1): 79-86.
[10]	Kuhn JL, Goldstein SA, Feldkamp LA, et al. Evaluation of a microcomputed tomography system to study trabe-cular bone structure[J]. J Orthop Res, 1990, 8(6): 833-842.
[11]	Schneider SW. A comparison of canal preparations in straight and curved root canals[J]. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol, 1971, 32(2): 271-275.
[12]	Kim JC, Moe MMK, Kim SK. A micro-computed to-mographic evaluation of root canal filling with a single gutta-percha cone and calcium silicate sealer[J]. Restor Dent Endod, 2020, 45(2): e18.
[13]	Jardine AP, Rosa KFV, Matoso FB, et al. Marginal gaps and internal voids after root-end filling using three cal-cium silicate-based materials: a Micro-CT analysis[J]. Braz Dent J, 2021, 32(4): 1-7.
[14]	Gandolfi MG, Siboni F, Prati C. Properties of a novel po-lysiloxane-guttapercha calcium silicate-bioglass-contai-ning root canal sealer[J]. Dent Mater, 2016, 32(5): e113-e126.
[15]	杨小倩, 杨蕊琦, 田俊, 等. 以生物陶瓷材料为封闭剂的单尖充填法应用现状与展望[J]. 中华口腔医学杂志, 2022, 57(4): 424-429.
	Yang XQ, Yang RQ, Tian J, et al. Application status and prospect of single-cone obturation technique with bioceramic sealers[J]. Chin J Stomatol, 2022, 57(4): 424-429.
[16]	Silva Almeida LH, Moraes RR, Morgental RD, et al. Are premixed calcium silicate-based endodontic sealers comparable to conventional materials? A systematic review of in vitro studies[J]. J Endod, 2017, 43(4): 527-535.
[17]	Ko SY, Choi HW, Jeong ED, et al. Main and accessory canal filling quality of a premixed calcium silicate endodontic sealer according to different obturation techniques[J]. Materials, 2020, 13(19): 4389.

根管封闭剂	n	充填率/%			P值
根管封闭剂	n	根冠1/3	根中1/3	根尖1/3	P值
P值		<0.01	<0.01	0.174
iRoot SP	10	97.84±0.80	97.36±2.17	92.64±5.82	0.052
C-Root SP	10	96.57±2.07	96.74±2.10	92.79±2.89	<0.01
GFB	10	93.87±2.30	92.02±2.80	89.71±4.05	<0.05

根管封闭剂	n	充填率/%			P值
根管封闭剂	n	根冠1/3	根中1/3	根尖1/3	P值
P值		<0.01	<0.01	<0.01
iRoot SP	10	96.75±1.69	97.12±2.16	96.37±4.65	0.941
C-Root SP	10	95.72±2.04	96.60±1.46	97.47±1.10	0.142
GFB	10	88.04±3.01	90.41±2.77	92.86±2.88	<0.05

3种根管封闭剂充填效果的Micro-CT评估

Evaluation of the filling effects of three root-canal sealers by Micro-CT

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 8

参考文献 17

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

根管封闭剂	部位	n	P值
根管封闭剂	部位	n	单尖充填法-超声活化单尖充填法
iRoot SP	根冠1/3	10	0.088
	根中1/3	10	0.807
	根尖1/3	10	0.130
	整体	10	0.441
C-Root SP	根冠1/3	10	0.368
	根中1/3	10	0.867
	根尖1/3	10	<0.01
	整体	10	0.421
GFB	根冠1/3	10	<0.01
	根中1/3	10	0.219
	根尖1/3	10	0.061
	整体	10	0.106

[1]	朱静雅, 黄日鸿, 曾祥倪, 蒋丽, 何飞. 3种生物陶瓷类根管封闭剂根尖封闭性的体外研究[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2025, 43(2): 204-211.
[2]	杨雯君, 韩佳佳, 王逸尘, 李凤翔, 杜启涛. 不同方法去除根管内充填材料的效果评价[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2022, 40(6): 685-689.
[3]	韩安鹏, 鲁方丽, 陆玉平, 李强, 陈栋. Micro-CT对遗传性牙本质发育缺陷离体患牙的特征研究[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2022, 40(2): 162-168.
[4]	余艺, 周昕, 郑黎薇. 乳牙根管治疗技术的进展[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2020, 38(2): 205-210.
[5]	张琛. 根管充填的难点和误区[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2017, 35(3): 232-238.
[6]	吴补领刘钊. 根管治疗术中的疼痛原因分析及疼痛控制[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2016, 34(5): 439-442.
[7]	祝书金刘翠玲郑政杨丽媛高旭. 不同根管封闭剂及清洗方法对纤维桩粘接强度的影响[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2015, 33(3): 311-314.
[8]	穆云静1，2 屈铁军2 程小刚2 王小勤2 赵明1 汪雨娜3 韩冰2 余擎2. 恒压式葡萄糖定量法评价4种根管封闭剂的封闭性能[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2012, 30(5): 474-477.
[9]	韩光政熊正慧陈亚明. 2种根管封闭剂对2种纤维桩剪切粘接强度的影响[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2011, 29(05): 497-502.
[10]	赵晓一董青王世明张成飞. 不同锥度牙胶尖热垂直加压法根管充填的临床疗效分析[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2008, 26(05): 505-508.
[11]	李灏来赵晓曦曾鸿斌李晓英陈文刘一静. 根管治疗术中根管充填的护理[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2007, 25(02): 161-162.
[12]	夏智敏;彭彬;边专;樊明文. 2种侧压器进入弯曲根管的深度及充填质量的比较[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2006, 24(05): 429-431.
[13]	李平,肖丽英,李伟,谭红,廖运茂,袁明龙. 新型纳米羟基磷灰石根充糊剂的细胞毒性研究[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2005, 23(05): 427-430.
[14]	邱峰. TH医用胶根管倒充填边缘密合性的研究[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2004, 22(06): 524-524.
[15]	郭斌,胡翔骅. 三种根管充填方法及充填材料对根尖封闭性能的影响[J]. , 1998, 16(02): 0-.