A comparative study of the canal configuration after shaping by protaper rotary and hand files in resin simulated canals

The purpose of this study was to compare the canal configuration after shaping by ProTaper rotary files and ProTaper hand files in resin simulated canals. Forty resin simulated canals with a curvature of J-shape and S-shape were divided into four groups by 10 blocks each Simulated root canals in resin block were prepared by ProTaper rotary files and ProTaper hand files using a crown-down pressureless technique All simulated canals were prepared up to size file at end-point of preparation. Pre- and post-instrumentation images were recorded with color scanner. Assessment of canal shape was completed with an image analysis program. Measurements were made at 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 mm from the apex. At each level, outer canal width, inner canal width, total canal width, and amount of transportation from original axis were recorded. Instrumentation time was recorded. The data were analyzed statistically using independent t-test. The result was that ProTaper hand files cause significantly less canal transportation from original axis of canal body and maintain original canal configuration better than ProTaper rotary files, however ProTaper hand files take more shaping time.

[1]  H. Raes,et al.  Shaping ability of GTTM Rotary Files in simulated resin root canals. , 2002, International endodontic journal.

[2]  Renato de Toledo Leonardo,et al.  Microscopic evaluation of three endodontic files pre- and postinstrumentation. , 1998, Journal of endodontics.

[3]  M E Eldeeb,et al.  The effect of different files on the preparation shape of severely curved canals. , 1985, International endodontic journal.

[4]  N. Novo,et al.  A comparison of shaping ability using ProFile, GT file, and Flex-R endodontic instruments in simulated canals. , 1999, Journal of endodontics.

[5]  M Hülsmann,et al.  Comparison of root canal preparation using different automated devices and hand instrumentation. , 1993, Journal of endodontics.

[6]  J. P. Pruett,et al.  Cyclic fatigue testing of nickel-titanium endodontic instruments. , 1997, Journal of endodontics.

[7]  S A Thompson,et al.  Shaping ability of Quantec Series 2000 rotary nickel-titanium instruments in simulated root canals: Part 2. , 2002, International endodontic journal.

[8]  G. Glickman,et al.  21st-century endodontics. , 2000, Journal of the American Dental Association.

[9]  Microscopic evaluation of three endodontic files pre- and postinstrumentation. , 1998 .

[10]  Sung Kyo Kim,et al.  A comparison of the shaping abilities of 4 nickel-titanium rotary instruments in simulated root canals. , 2003, Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics.

[11]  P. Machtou,et al.  Location of contact areas on rotary Profile instruments in relationship to the forces developed during mechanical preparation on extracted teeth. , 2000, International endodontic journal.

[12]  K. Lim,et al.  The validity of simulated root canals for the investigation of the prepared root canal shape. , 1985, International endodontic journal.

[13]  S B Dove,et al.  A comparison of root canal preparations using Ni-Ti hand, Ni-Ti engine-driven, and K-Flex endodontic instruments. , 1995, Journal of endodontics.

[14]  P. Dummer,et al.  Canal shapes produced sequentially during instrumentation with Quantec LX rotary nickel-titanium instruments: a study in simulated canals. , 2000, International endodontic journal.

[15]  B. Mazé,et al.  A comparison of the effect of modified and nonmodified instrument tips on apical canal configuration. , 1986, Journal of endodontics.

[16]  S. W. Schneider,et al.  A comparison of canal preparations in straight and curved root canals. , 1971, Oral surgery, oral medicine, and oral pathology.

[17]  J. Simon,et al.  A comparison of the effect of modified and nonmodified instrument tips on apical canal configuration. Part II. , 1988, Journal of endodontics.

[18]  H Schilder,et al.  Filling root canals in three dimensions. , 1967, Dental clinics of North America.

[19]  H. Gerstein,et al.  An initial investigation of the bending and torsional properties of Nitinol root canal files. , 1988, Journal of endodontics.

[20]  Jean-Paul Micallef,et al.  Location of contact areas on rotary Profile1 instruments in relationship to the forces developed during mechanical preparation on extracted teeth , 1999 .

[21]  S. A. Thompson,et al.  Shaping ability of Quantec Series 2000 rotary nickel-titanium instruments in simulated root canals: Part 1. , 2002, International endodontic journal.

[22]  C E del Rio,et al.  Comparison of nickel-titanium and stainless steel hand-file instrumentation using computed tomography. , 1996, Journal of endodontics.

[23]  H. Park,et al.  A comparison of Greater Taper files, ProFiles, and stainless steel files to shape curved root canals. , 2001, Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics.

[24]  P M Dummer,et al.  A comparison of stainless steel Flexofiles and nickel-titanium NiTiFlex files during the shaping of simulated canals. , 1997, International endodontic journal.

[25]  C. D. del Río,et al.  Comparison of mechanical and standard hand instrumentation techniques in curved root canals. , 1990, Journal of endodontics.

[26]  P. Esposito,et al.  A comparison of canal preparation with nickel-titanium and stainless steel instruments. , 1995, Journal of endodontics.

[27]  H Schilder,et al.  Cleaning and shaping the root canal. , 1974, Dental clinics of North America.

[28]  O. Zmener,et al.  Effectiveness of nickel-titanium files for preparing curved root canals. , 1995, Endodontics & dental traumatology.

[29]  T. Svec,et al.  Analysis of Ni-Ti versus stainless steel instrumentation in resin simulated canals. , 1997, Journal of endodontics.