scholarly journals Centering Ability of ProTaper Next and WaveOne Classic in J-Shape Simulated Root Canals

2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giuseppe Troiano ◽  
Mario Dioguardi ◽  
Armando Cocco ◽  
Michele Giuliani ◽  
Cristiano Fabiani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Reference Point ◽  
Lower Amount ◽  
Photographic Method ◽  
Root Canals ◽  
San Rafael ◽  
Shaping Ability ◽  
Different Levels ◽  
Point Level

Introduction. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the shaping and centering ability of ProTaper Next (PTN; Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland) and WaveOne Classic systems (Dentsply Maillefer) in simulated root canals. Methods. Forty J-shaped canals in resin blocks were assigned to two groups (n=20 for each group). Photographic method was used to record pre- and postinstrumentation images. After superimposition, centering and shaping ability were recorded at 9 different levels from the apex using the software Autocad 2013 (Autodesk Inc., San Rafael, USA). Results. Shaping procedures with ProTaper Next resulted in a lower amount of resin removed at each reference point level. In addition, the pattern of centering ability improved after the use of ProTaper Next in 8 of 9 measurement points. Conclusions. Within the limitations of this study, shaping procedures with ProTaper Next instruments demonstrated a lower amount of resin removed and a better centering ability than WaveOne Classic system.

scholarly journals Increase the glyde path diameter improves the centering ability of F6 Skytaper

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (01) ◽  
pp. 089-093 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giuseppe Troiano ◽  
Mario Dioguardi ◽  
Armando Cocco ◽  
Khrystyna Zhurakivska ◽  
Domenico Ciavarella ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lower Amount ◽  
Photographic Images ◽  
Root Canals ◽  
Glide Path ◽  
Before And After ◽  
San Rafael ◽  
Almost All ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Shaping Ability ◽  
Different Levels

ABSTRACT Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the impact of glide path preparation, performed with PathGlider 0.15 (Komet Brasseler GmbH & Co., Lemgo, Germany) and PathGlider 0.20 (Komet Brasseler GmbH & Co., Lemgo, Germany), on the centering ability of 25-size F6 Skytaper in J-shape simulated root canals, compared with no glide path executed. Materials and Methods: Sixty J-shaped ISO 15 0.02 taper endo training blocks (Dentsply Maillefer) were assigned to three groups (n = 20 for each group). Photographic images were taken on endoblocks before and after shaping procedures. After superimposition, the software AutoCAD 2013 (Autodesk Inc., San Rafael, USA) was used for record the centering and shaping ability at 9 different levels from the apex. Results: Shaping procedures including the using of PathGlider 0.20 resulted in a lower amount of resin removed and in a clear improvement of centering ability of the Skytaper 0.25 at almost all reference point levels. Conclusions: Within the limitations of this study, it could be concluded that the glide path procedure, performed with the PathGlider 0.20 before the shaping with 25-size F6 Skytaper, might determine a lower amount of resin removed and a better centering ability compared with the groups without glide path procedure and those treated with PathGlider 0.15.

scholarly journals Influence of Operator's Experience on the Shaping Ability of Protaper Universal and Waveone Systems: A Comparative Study on Simulated Root Canals

2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 546-552 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giuseppe Troiano ◽  
Mario Dioguardi ◽  
Armando Cocco ◽  
Giovanni Giannatempo ◽  
Luigi Laino ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Study ◽  
Lower Amount ◽  
Photographic Method ◽  
Preparation Time ◽  
Operator Experience ◽  
Root Canals ◽  
Experienced Operator ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Experience Factor ◽  
Shaping Ability

Objective: To assess the influence of operator experience on: shaping and centering ability, mean preparation time and presence of canal aberrations of ProTaper Universal and WaveOne systems on simulated root canals. Materials and Methods: Sixty S-shaped canals in resin blocks were assigned to four groups (n=15 for each group). Group1 (Experienced operator, ProTaper), Group2 (Experienced operator, WaveOne), Group3 (Inexperienced operator, ProTaper), Group4 (Inexperienced operator, WaveOne). Photographic method was used to record pre- and post-instrumentations images. After superimposition, it has been evaluated presence of canal aberrations and differences in shaping and centering ability between groups. Results: WaveOne system produced a lower amount of canal aberrations both in the hand of expert than inexpert operators. However, a WaveOne instrument breakage occurred in the hands of an inexperienced operator. No differences have been found in the evaluation of shaping ability with both systematics. Operator’s experience doesn't influence the shaping ability of ProTaper and WaveOne systems. Conclusion: Experience factor could influence the centering ability in the use of both the systematics. However, WaveOne Primary reduce the mean preparation time and the presence of canal aberrations.

scholarly journals Comparison of the canal transportation of ProTaper GOLD, WaveOne GOLD, and TruNatomy in simulated double-curved canals

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
HyeWon Kim ◽  
Su-Jin Jeon ◽  
Min-Seock Seo
Keyword(s):  
Preparation Time ◽  
Root Canals ◽  
Shaping Time ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Canal Transportation ◽  
Shaping Ability ◽  
One Way Anova ◽  
Different Levels ◽  
Paired T Test ◽  
Better Than

Abstract Background In root canal preparations, it is important to maintain the original canal shape. However, it is difficult to accomplish this, especially due to the complex canal anatomy. This study aimed to compare the shaping ability of the ProTaper GOLD, WaveOne GOLD, and newly developed TruNatomy in simulated S-shaped canals. Methods The root canals of 60 S-shaped resin blocks were dyed using ink and photographed. The blocks were then randomly divided into three groups: group ProTaper GOLD (n = 20), WaveOne GOLD (n = 20), and TruNatomy (n = 20). The simulated canals were instrumented according to the NiTi file system and photographed again after being dyed with red ink. The pre- and post-preparation images were superimposed, and the amount of resin removed from both the mesial and distal sides of the canal measured up to 9 mm from the apical terminus, with a 1 mm increment. The preparation time was also calculated. A paired t-test was used to determine the degree of deviation at different levels within the groups. To compare the degree of transportation at different levels between the groups, one-way ANOVA and Kruskal–Wallis tests were performed according to the normality. Results TruNatomy showed a significant deviation between the mesial and distal sides of the canal only in the coronal area at 6, 7, 8, and 9 mm levels of the canal (p < 0.05). When comparing the amount of transportation in the 3 groups at 9 different levels, TruNatomy showed significantly less canal transportation than the other groups at the 3-and 5-mm levels of the canal (p < 0.05), while ProTaper GOLD showed the largest amount of transportation in the apical curved area at the 2 and 3 mm levels (p < 0.05). TruNatomy removed less resin than other groups in all sections (p < 0.05), while ProTaper GOLD removed slightly more resin than WaveOne GOLD; however, there was no significant difference (p = 0.043). Shaping time was the least for TruNatomy, followed by the WaveOne GOLD and ProTaper GOLD (p < 0.05). Conclusions TruNatomy maintained the original apical canal curvature in S-shaped curved canals better than ProTaper GOLD and WaveOne GOLD.

scholarly journals Comparison of the Shaping Ability of ProTaper GOLD, WaveOne GOLD, and TruNatomy in Simulated Double-curved Canals

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
HyeWon Kim ◽  
Su-Jin Jeon ◽  
Min-Seock Seo
Keyword(s):  
Preparation Time ◽  
Root Canals ◽  
Shaping Time ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Canal Transportation ◽  
Shaping Ability ◽  
One Way Anova ◽  
Different Levels ◽  
Paired T Test ◽  
Better Than

Abstract Background: In root canal preparations, it is important to maintain the original canal shape. However, it is difficult to accomplish this, especially due to the complex canal anatomy. This study aimed to compare the shaping ability of the ProTaper GOLD, WaveOne GOLD, and newly developed TruNatomy in simulated S-shaped canals.Materials and methods: The root canals of 60 S-shaped resin blocks were dyed using ink and photographed. The blocks were then randomly divided into three groups: group ProTaper GOLD (n=20), WaveOne GOLD (n=20), and TruNatomy (n=20). The simulated canals were instrumented according to the NiTi file system and photographed again after being dyed with red ink. The pre- and post-preparation images were superimposed, and the amount of resin removed from both the mesial and distal sides of the canal measured up to 9 mm from the apical terminus, with a 1 mm increment. The preparation time was also calculated. A paired t-test was used to determine the degree of deviation at different levels within the groups. To compare the degree of transportation at different levels between the groups, one-way ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis tests were performed according to the normality. Results: TruNatomy showed a significant deviation between the mesial and distal sides of the canal only in the coronal area at 6, 7, 8, and 9 mm levels of the canal (p < 0.05). When comparing the amount of transportation in the 3 groups at 9 different levels, TruNatomy showed significantly less canal transportation than the other groups at the 3, 5, and 6 mm levels of the canal (p < 0.05), while ProTaper GOLD showed the largest amount of transportation in the apical curved area at the 2 and 3 mm levels (p < 0.05). TruNatomy removed less resin than other groups in all sections (p < 0.05), while ProTaper GOLD removed slightly more resin than WaveOne GOLD; however, there was no significant difference (p=0.043). Shaping time was the least for TruNatomy, followed by the WaveOne GOLD and ProTaper GOLD (p < 0.05).Conclusions: TruNatomy maintained the original canal curvature in S-shaped curved canals better than ProTaper GOLD and WaveOne GOLD.

scholarly journals Shaping ability of the profile 25/0.06 and protaper F2 in rotary motion, and reciproc in simulated canals

PeerJ ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. e6109
Author(s):  
Gül Çelik ◽  
Murat Maden ◽  
Ahmet Savgat ◽  
Hikmet Orhan
Keyword(s):  
File Systems ◽  
Apical Part ◽  
Middle Part ◽  
Nickel Titanium ◽  
Human Teeth ◽  
Root Canals ◽  
Single File ◽  
Working Length ◽  
Shaping Ability ◽  
Different Levels

Background Since the introduction of nickel–titanium (Ni–Ti) instruments to dentistry, a wide variety of Ni–Ti instruments have become commercially available. These Ni–Ti instruments are expensive, which limits their usage in developing countries and forces practitioners to use instruments repeatedly. Another problem is the possible prion cross-contamination associated with the multiple usage of endodontic instruments. In addition, the use of these instruments requires new skills and experience. In this article, the shaping capacities of two conventional rotary file systems, ProFile 25/0.06 and ProTaper F2, were reviewed and compared with the Reciproc single-file system. Methods A total of 45 simulated canals with 40° curvature, in clear resin blocks, were prepared using conventional rotary systems consisting of ProFile orifice shaping (OS) #3 and final flaring #25/.06, Reciproc R25, and ProTaper shaping file SX and finishing file F2. Pre-and post-instrumentation images were analyzed at ten different levels, using AutoCAD 2007 software. The measurement positions were defined in 1-mm intervals: positions 0–3 established the apical part, positions 4–6 constituted the middle part, and positions 7–10 established the coronal part of the canal. The amount of removed resin, the transportation, instrumentation time, change in working length (WL), instrumentation fractures, and the presence of ledge were evaluated. Data were analyzed using ANOVA, Kruskal–Wallis and independent t-test (p < 0.001). Results ProFile removed the least resin (p < 0.001) and caused less transportation than Reciproc and ProTaper, in total (p < 0.001). ProTaper caused more transportation ProFile and Reciproc in the apical part (p < 0.000). Reciproc caused more transportation than ProTaper and ProFile (p < 0.001), and the transportation tendency toward the inner aspect of the curvature in the middle part. Reciproc caused the less transportation than ProFile and ProTaper in the coronal part. The transportations tended to occur toward the outside of the curvature, except the middle part with Reciproc and at points 5 and 6 with ProTaper. There were no significant differences among the groups in terms of maintaining the original WL. Reciproc was significantly faster than the others group (p < 0.001). Only one instrument fracture (25/0.06 ProFile) was noted. All groups showed one ledge each. Discussion The results of the present study showed that both ProFile 25/06 and ProTaper F2, combined with a file used for coronal enlargement (OS3 and SX), have the potential to create satisfactory canal shape in the curved root canals. Further studies using real human teeth are needed to confirm our results.

scholarly journals Comparative evaluation of shaping ability of trunatomy and protaper gold files in curved canals using cone?beam computed tomography: An invitro study

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 101-105
Author(s):  
Kadam Krutika Kiran ◽  
Vagarali Hemant ◽  
Pujar Madhu A ◽  
Tamase Aishwarya S ◽  
Sahana Umesh
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Cone Beam Computed Tomography ◽  
Root Canal ◽  
Cone Beam ◽  
Human Teeth ◽  
Root Canals ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Canal Transportation ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Shaping Ability

This study aimed to compare the canal transportation and canal centering ability in the preparation of curved root canals after instrumentation with TruNatomy (TN) (TN; Dentsply Sirona, Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland) and ProTaper Gold (PG) (PG; Dentsply, Tulsa Dental Specialties, Tulsa, OK, USA) files using cone‑beam computed tomography (CBCT). 30 Single rooted extracted human teeth with root curvature ranging from 20-30° according to Schneider’s method were selected. Teeth with any visible cracks or fractures, calcifications, previous root canal treatments were excluded. The teeth were randomly assigned into two groups i.e. Group 1-TN and Group 2-PG (n = 15 each). The teeth were instrumented according to manufacturer’s guidelines for both the groups. Canals were scanned using a CBCT scanner before and after preparation to evaluate the transportation and centering ratio at 3 mm, 5 mm, and 7 mm from the apex. The data analysis was done using SPSS software and the test used was independent sample t test for comparison between the 2 groups.Data obtained suggested that TN group presented lesser canal transportation at the middle third of the root. The PG group showed better centering abitily at apical third of the root canal when both the groups were compared. TN resulted in less transportation than PG at the middle third, and PG showed better centering ability at the apical third. Overall, both systems safely prepared root canals, causing minimal errors.

scholarly journals Frequency of number of roots and root canals of maxillary first premolar teeth.

2021 ◽  
Vol 28 (10) ◽  
pp. 1513-1518
Author(s):  
Munawar Aziz Khattak ◽  
Sana Arbab ◽  
Syed Amjad Shah
Keyword(s):  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Maxillofacial Surgery ◽  
P Value ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Mean Values ◽  
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa ◽  
Root Canals ◽  
India Ink ◽  
Different Levels ◽  
Chamber Floor

Objective: To determine the frequency of the number of roots and root canals in a sample of 250 extracted maxillary first premolar teeth of patients visiting Peshawar Dental College and Hospital Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Study Design: Cross Sectional. Setting: Department of Oral Biology, Peshawar Dental College and Hospital Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Period: April 2016 to December 2016. Material & Methods: A total of 250 extracted human maxillary first premolars were collected from the Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, Peshawar Dental College, and Hospital Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. All teeth were visually inspected to count the number of roots. Subsequently, the access cavity was prepared, and pulp extirpated from each tooth. Endodontic explorer was used to locating the canal orifice(s) at the pulp chamber floor. Later the root canal orifices were injected with India ink to stain the canals. After that roots of teeth were sectioned at different levels to note down the number of canals. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 19. The statistical significance of the variations from mean values was considered significant if the p-value was less than 0.05. Results: Out of 250 maxillary first premolar teeth, 44.8% had one root, 40.4% had two separate and 12.8% had two fused roots. Three roots were seen in 2.0% teeth. Two root canals were present in the vast majority (70.4%), whereas one and three root canals were seen in 27.6% and 2.0% teeth, respectively. The correlation between the number of roots and root canals of maxillary first premolar teeth was highly significant. Conclusions: There was a high frequency of maxillary first premolars with two roots and two root canals.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document