Publications by authors named "Lucas R Capeletti"

2 Publications

  • Page 1 of 1

Guided endodontics: The impact of new technologies on complex case solution.

Aust Endod J 2021 Mar 3. Epub 2021 Mar 3.

School of Dentistry, Federal University of Goiás, Goiânia, Brazil.

Discuss the impact of new diagnostic and planning technologies on the resolution of a clinical case of an upper central incisor with lateral perforation, root canal calcification and apical periodontitis. A 44-year-old woman sought treatment because of a colour change in an anterior tooth. The tooth had already been endodontically accessed, and she reported that two different clinicians had failed to locate the root canal. A Cone Beam Computed Tomography scan showed excessive wear and root perforation in the middle third, as well as pulp canal obliteration in the apical third. The perforation was treated using a biomaterial, and the root canal was located using guided endodontics. This treatment protocol was used to access, prepare, medicate with calcium hydroxide for 21 days and fill the root canal. Treatment results were satisfactory at 6-month follow-up.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/aej.12498DOI Listing
March 2021

Guided Endodontics: Volume of Dental Tissue Removed by Guided Access Cavity Preparation-An Ex Vivo Study.

J Endod 2020 Dec 16;46(12):1907-1912. Epub 2020 Sep 16.

Faculdade de Odontologia, Universidade Federal de Goiás, Goiânia, Goiás, Brazil.

Introduction: Guided endodontics emerged as an alternative method capable of providing greater precision and accuracy to endodontic treatments. The aim of the present study was to compare the volume of dental tissue removed after guided endodontic access (GEA) and conventional endodontic access (CEA) to mandibular incisors and upper molars.

Methods: Twenty extracted human mandibular incisors and upper molars were selected and submitted to cone-beam computed tomographic (CBCT) examination. They were divided into 2 groups, G1 (mandibular incisors) and G2 (maxillary molars), and subdivided into G1a (CEA), G1b (GEA), G2a (CEA), and G2b (GEA). The Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine files obtained by examining the CBCT scans were transferred to InVesalius software (Renato Archer Information Technology Center, Campinas, SP, Brazil) to calculate the initial volume of each tooth. G1b and G2b teeth were scanned with a device to plan and print the guides. After gaining endodontic access, new CBCT examinations were performed to calculate the final volume of each sample unit. The Student t test for independent samples compared the volumes among the groups.

Results: G1 group had an average volume reduction of 31.667 mm (10.62%) using CEA and 26.523 mm (10.65%) using GEA with no significant difference among the groups (P = .960). There was an average volume reduction of 62.526 mm (5.86%) in the G2 group using CEA and 45.677 mm (4.11%) using GEA with a significant difference among the groups (P = .004).

Conclusions: GEA preserved a greater volume of dental tissue in extracted upper human molars than CEA; however, there was no significant difference between CEA and GEA in the volume of dental tissue removed from mandibular incisors.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2020.09.008DOI Listing
December 2020