Cargando…
Comparative Evaluation of Dentinal Defects After Root Canal Preparation Using Various Nickel Titanium Files: An In Vitro Study
Aim: This study set out to compare the damage done to dentin by three distinct titanium file brands - the Hyflex EDM, the ProTaper Next, and the Waveone Gold Nickel - in order to draw conclusions about which one is the most effective. Materials and methods: Forty-first premolars in the mandible with...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Cureus
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10252150/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37303406 http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.38829 |
_version_ | 1785056101254823936 |
---|---|
author | Batra, Renu Dixit, Ankita Tiwari, Anushree Kumar, Amit Sinha, Shagun Badnaware, Sheetal Singh, Ramanpal |
author_facet | Batra, Renu Dixit, Ankita Tiwari, Anushree Kumar, Amit Sinha, Shagun Badnaware, Sheetal Singh, Ramanpal |
author_sort | Batra, Renu |
collection | PubMed |
description | Aim: This study set out to compare the damage done to dentin by three distinct titanium file brands - the Hyflex EDM, the ProTaper Next, and the Waveone Gold Nickel - in order to draw conclusions about which one is the most effective. Materials and methods: Forty-first premolars in the mandible with straight canals and single roots were instrumented using Hyflex EDM, Waveone Gold, and Protaper Next. Dentinal flaws after endodontic treatment were studied by sectioning specimens using a hard tissue microtome and analyzing them under a stereomicroscope. Results: There was no discernible variation between the groups in the coronal third (p=0.312) or apical third (p=0.076). Hyflex EDM and Protaper Next differed significantly in the middle portion of the tape (p=0.016). The Hyflex EDM sample had the fewest cracks. There was no statistically significant difference between Hyflex EDM and Waveone Gold; however, Hyflex EDM had fewer fractures in the middle third of the sample than Waveone Gold did. Conclusion:Electric discharge machining (EDM) files made from Hyflex proved to be far superior to their Protaper Next and Waveone Gold counterparts as they induced the fewest cracks in the middle third of the root dentin. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10252150 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Cureus |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-102521502023-06-10 Comparative Evaluation of Dentinal Defects After Root Canal Preparation Using Various Nickel Titanium Files: An In Vitro Study Batra, Renu Dixit, Ankita Tiwari, Anushree Kumar, Amit Sinha, Shagun Badnaware, Sheetal Singh, Ramanpal Cureus Dentistry Aim: This study set out to compare the damage done to dentin by three distinct titanium file brands - the Hyflex EDM, the ProTaper Next, and the Waveone Gold Nickel - in order to draw conclusions about which one is the most effective. Materials and methods: Forty-first premolars in the mandible with straight canals and single roots were instrumented using Hyflex EDM, Waveone Gold, and Protaper Next. Dentinal flaws after endodontic treatment were studied by sectioning specimens using a hard tissue microtome and analyzing them under a stereomicroscope. Results: There was no discernible variation between the groups in the coronal third (p=0.312) or apical third (p=0.076). Hyflex EDM and Protaper Next differed significantly in the middle portion of the tape (p=0.016). The Hyflex EDM sample had the fewest cracks. There was no statistically significant difference between Hyflex EDM and Waveone Gold; however, Hyflex EDM had fewer fractures in the middle third of the sample than Waveone Gold did. Conclusion:Electric discharge machining (EDM) files made from Hyflex proved to be far superior to their Protaper Next and Waveone Gold counterparts as they induced the fewest cracks in the middle third of the root dentin. Cureus 2023-05-10 /pmc/articles/PMC10252150/ /pubmed/37303406 http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.38829 Text en Copyright © 2023, Batra et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Dentistry Batra, Renu Dixit, Ankita Tiwari, Anushree Kumar, Amit Sinha, Shagun Badnaware, Sheetal Singh, Ramanpal Comparative Evaluation of Dentinal Defects After Root Canal Preparation Using Various Nickel Titanium Files: An In Vitro Study |
title | Comparative Evaluation of Dentinal Defects After Root Canal Preparation Using Various Nickel Titanium Files: An In Vitro Study |
title_full | Comparative Evaluation of Dentinal Defects After Root Canal Preparation Using Various Nickel Titanium Files: An In Vitro Study |
title_fullStr | Comparative Evaluation of Dentinal Defects After Root Canal Preparation Using Various Nickel Titanium Files: An In Vitro Study |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparative Evaluation of Dentinal Defects After Root Canal Preparation Using Various Nickel Titanium Files: An In Vitro Study |
title_short | Comparative Evaluation of Dentinal Defects After Root Canal Preparation Using Various Nickel Titanium Files: An In Vitro Study |
title_sort | comparative evaluation of dentinal defects after root canal preparation using various nickel titanium files: an in vitro study |
topic | Dentistry |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10252150/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37303406 http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.38829 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT batrarenu comparativeevaluationofdentinaldefectsafterrootcanalpreparationusingvariousnickeltitaniumfilesaninvitrostudy AT dixitankita comparativeevaluationofdentinaldefectsafterrootcanalpreparationusingvariousnickeltitaniumfilesaninvitrostudy AT tiwarianushree comparativeevaluationofdentinaldefectsafterrootcanalpreparationusingvariousnickeltitaniumfilesaninvitrostudy AT kumaramit comparativeevaluationofdentinaldefectsafterrootcanalpreparationusingvariousnickeltitaniumfilesaninvitrostudy AT sinhashagun comparativeevaluationofdentinaldefectsafterrootcanalpreparationusingvariousnickeltitaniumfilesaninvitrostudy AT badnawaresheetal comparativeevaluationofdentinaldefectsafterrootcanalpreparationusingvariousnickeltitaniumfilesaninvitrostudy AT singhramanpal comparativeevaluationofdentinaldefectsafterrootcanalpreparationusingvariousnickeltitaniumfilesaninvitrostudy |