KACD
Search
- Page Path
- HOME > Search
Research Article
- Comparison of canal transportation in simulated curved canals prepared with ProTaper Universal and ProTaper Gold systems
- Emmanuel João Nogueira Leal Silva, Brenda Leite Muniz, Frederico Pires, Felipe Gonçalves Belladonna, Aline Almeida Neves, Erick Miranda Souza, Gustavo De-Deus
- Restor Dent Endod 2016;41(1):1-5. Published online February 4, 2016
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2016.41.1.1
-
Abstract
PDF
PubReader
ePub Objectives The purpose of this study was to assess the ability of ProTaper Gold (PTG, Dentsply Maillefer) in maintaining the original profile of root canal anatomy. For that, ProTaper Universal (PTU, Dentsply Maillefer) was used as reference techniques for comparison.
Materials and Methods Twenty simulated curved canals manufactured in clear resin blocks were randomly assigned to 2 groups (
n = 10) according to the system used for canal instrumentation: PTU and PTG groups, upto F2 files (25/0.08). Color stereomicroscopic images from each block were taken exactly at the same position before and after instrumentation. All image processing and data analysis were performed with an open source program (FIJI). Evaluation of canal transportation was obtained for two independent canal regions: straight and curved levels. Student'st test was used with a cut-off for significance set at α = 5%.Results Instrumentation systems significantly influenced canal transportation (
p < 0.0001). A significant interaction between instrumentation system and root canal level (p < 0.0001) was found. PTU and PTG systems produced similar canal transportation at the straight part, while PTG system resulted in lower canal transportation than PTU system at the curved part. Canal transportation was higher at the curved canal portion (p < 0.0001).Conclusions PTG system produced overall less canal transportation in the curved portion when compared to PTU system.
- 25 View
- 0 Download
Original Article
- Step by step analysis of root canal instrumentation with ProTaper®
- Mi-Hee Kim, Bock Huh, Hyeon-Cheol Kim, Jeong-Kil Park
- J Korean Acad Conserv Dent 2006;31(1):50-57. Published online January 31, 2006
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2006.31.1.050
-
Abstract
PDFPubReaderePub
The purpose of this study was to investigate influence of each file step of ProTaper® system on canal transportation.
Twenty simulated canals were prepared with either engine-driven ProTaper® or manual ProTaper®. Group R-resin blocks were instrumented with rotary ProTaper® and group M-resin blocks were instrumented with manual ProTaper®. Pre-operative resin blocks and post-operative resin blocks after each file step preparation were scanned. Original canal image and the image after using each file step were superimposed for calculation of centering ratio. The image after using each file step and image after using previous file step were superimposed for calculation of the amount of deviation. Measurements were taken horizontally at five different levels (1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 mm) from the level of apical foramen.
In rotary ProTaper® instrumentation group, centering ratio and the amount of deviation of each step at all levels were not significantly different (p > 0.05). In manual ProTaper® instrumentation group, centering ratio and the amount of deviation of each step at all levels except of 1 mm were not significantly different (p > 0.05). At the level of 1 mm, F2 file step had significantly large centering ratio and the amount of deviation (p < 0.05).
Under the condition of this study, F2 file step of manual ProTaper® tended to transport the apical part of the canals than that of rotary ProTaper®.
- 19 View
- 0 Download
First
Prev
