Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add filters








Year range
1.
Article | IMSEAR | ID: sea-204976

ABSTRACT

Background: Different instrumentation systems and techniques are used in the instrumentation of the root canal system which can result in debris formation that may be extruded beyond the apical foramen and cause post-operative pain. Aim of the study: Aim of the current study was to compare the amount of apically extruded debris and irrigants during instrumentation using 2 reciprocating single file systems (WaveOne Gold, Reciproc blue) and 2 continuous rotation file systems (ProTaper Gold, 2Shape) and comparing them to the control group (ProTaper Universal). Materials and Methods: Total 50 palatal roots of freshly extracted human maxillary first molars were collected for this study. Teeth were decoronated to a unified length of 15 mm, and then pushed through a pre-perforated rubber cap of pre-weighed glass vial then the root-cap complex was fitted on a glass vial and rubber dam ligated with dental floss was used to cover the glass vial for preventing the coronally extruded debris and irrigants from contaminating the external surface, gauge 25 needle was inserted parallel to the root surface through the rubber dam and cup. Samples were then randomly divided into 5 groups. Results: Data obtained were statistically analyzed using One Way ANOVA and LSD tests. The result showed that all groups resulted in apical extrusion of debris and irrigants, as it showed that the 2Shape Group B, Wave One Gold Group C and Reciproc blue Group D are statistically comparable, while ProTaper Gold Group A and ProTaper Universal Groups E showed statistically significant difference (p<0.05). Conclusions: All of the systems resulted in apical extrusion. There was no influence of kinematic movements on apical extrusion. The 2shape file system produced the least amount of apical extrusion while the ProTaper Universal showed the greatest amount.

2.
Article | IMSEAR | ID: sea-204958

ABSTRACT

Background: Smear layer is always formed during the instrumentation process due to the action of endodontic instruments during the shaping process and it should be removed as it might decrease the overall success of endodontic therapy. Aim of the study: To compare the cleaning efficiency of different rotary Ni-Ti systems: ProTaper Next, Xpendo Shaper and WaveOne Gold by assessing their ability to remove the smear layer from root canals walls. Methods and materials: A total of 24 palatal roots of maxillary molars were used in this study and randomly assigned into 3 groups (n=8) as follows: Group 1: instrumentation with ProTaper Next system (Dentsply Maillefer, Switzerland), Group 2: instrumentation with Xp-endo Shaper system (FKG Dentaire, Switzerland) and Group 3: instrumentation with WaveOne Gold system (Dentsply Maillefer, Switzerland). The samples were irrigated with 5.25% NaOCl. All samples were then examined by scanning electron microscope (SEM) at the center of the coronal, middle and apical thirds. The data was statistically analyzed using Kruskal Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests. Results: ProTaper Next files showed a lower average mean of smear layer when compared to WaveOne Gold and Xp-endo Shaper files at the coronal third. No significant differences between the average means of smear layer were found at the middle and apical thirds. Conclusion: None of the tested groups showed a completely smear layer free root canal walls. In general, ProTaper Next files showed the best performance at the coronal third. All the files showed comparable performance at the middle and apical thirds.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL