Comparison of Canal Transportation and Centric Ability of Two Nickel-Titanium Rotary Systems Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography: An In Vitro Study

Abstract Aim The aim of this study was to compare the canal transportation and canal centric ability of One Shape (Micro Mega, Besançon, France) and Mani Silk (Mani Utsunomiya, Tochigi, Japan) nickel-titanium (NiTi) rotary files in curved canals with the help of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). Materials and Methods Total 40 mesiobuccal canals of maxillary molars with an angle of curvature ranging between 25 and 45 degrees were divided according to the instrument used in canal preparation into two groups 20 samples each: One Shape (group 1) and Mani Silk (group 2). Pre- and post-instrumentation scans were performed using CBCT (Carestream CS 9300 scanner) to evaluate the transportation and centric ability at apical, middle, and coronal levels using unpaired Student's t-test. Results Mani Silk file showed significantly less canal transportation and better canal centric ability compared to One Shape system. Conclusion Mani Silk file maintained original canal curvature better than One Shape NiTi rotary file.

Download Full-text

Comparison of Canaltransportation and Centering Ability of Protaper Next, Hyflex Cmandwave One System Using Cone - Beam Computed Tomography-an in-Vitro Study

Dental Journal of Advance Studies ◽

10.1055/s-0038-1672052 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 04 (02) ◽

pp. 088-093

Author(s):

Veerendra Uppin ◽

Vinaya Varghese ◽

Madhu Pujar ◽

Nirmal Kurian ◽

Hemant Vagarali

Keyword(s):

Computed Tomography ◽

Cone Beam Computed Tomography ◽

In Vitro Study ◽

Cone Beam ◽

Root Canals ◽

Group 3 ◽

Canal Transportation ◽

Group 2 ◽

Curved Root Canals

Abstract Objective: The aim of the study was to compare the canal transportation and centering ability of Rotary ProTaper Next, Hyflex CM and Wave One primary systems using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) in curved root canals. Materials and Methods: Total 30 freshly extracted maxillary first molars having root canals with curvature between 10°- 20° were divided into three groups of 10 teeth each. All teeth were scanned by CBCT to determine the root canal shape before instrumentation. In Group 1, the canals were prepared with ProTaper Next files, in Group 2 with Hyflex CM files and in Group 3 with Wave One files. After preparation, post-instrumentation scan was performed. Pre-instrumentation and post-instrumentation images were obtained at 3 mm and 6 mm above the apical foramen and were compared using CBCT software. The amount of canal transportation and centering ability were assessed and statistically compared with one way analysis of variance and Tukey honestly significant test. (p<0.05). Results: All instrumentation systems used resulted in some amount of canal transportation. Data obtained suggested that Wave One files caused significantly lesser transportation and remained better centered in the canal than Hyflex CM and Rotary ProTaper Next files. Conclusion: The canal preparation with Wave One files results in lesser transportation and better centering ability than Hyflex CM and ProTaper Next rotary files in curved root canals.

Download Full-text