Cargando…
Efficiency of the Self Adjusting File, WaveOne, Reciproc, ProTaper and hand files in root canal debridement
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the canal debridement capabilities of three single file systems, ProTaper, and K-files in oval-shaped canals. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy-five extracted human mandibular central incisors with oval-shaped root canals were selected. A radiopaque cont...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4144129/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25202211 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/1305-7456.137636 |
_version_ | 1782332011134844928 |
---|---|
author | Topcu, K. Meltem Karatas, Ertugrul Ozsu, Damla Ersoy, Ibrahim |
author_facet | Topcu, K. Meltem Karatas, Ertugrul Ozsu, Damla Ersoy, Ibrahim |
author_sort | Topcu, K. Meltem |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the canal debridement capabilities of three single file systems, ProTaper, and K-files in oval-shaped canals. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy-five extracted human mandibular central incisors with oval-shaped root canals were selected. A radiopaque contrast medium (Metapex; Meta Biomed Co. Ltd., Chungcheongbuk-do, Korea) was introduced into the canal systems and the self-adjusting file (SAF), WaveOne, Reciproc, ProTaper, and K-files were used for the instrumentation of the canals. The percentage of removed contrast medium was calculated using pre- and post-operative radiographs. RESULTS: An overall comparison between the groups revealed that the hand file (HF) and SAF groups presented the lowest percentage of removed contrast medium, whereas the WaveOne group showed the highest percentage (P < 0.001). The ProTaper group removed more contrast medium than the SAF and HF groups (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: None of the instruments was able to remove the contrast medium completely. WaveOne performed significantly better than other groups. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4144129 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-41441292014-09-08 Efficiency of the Self Adjusting File, WaveOne, Reciproc, ProTaper and hand files in root canal debridement Topcu, K. Meltem Karatas, Ertugrul Ozsu, Damla Ersoy, Ibrahim Eur J Dent Original Article OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the canal debridement capabilities of three single file systems, ProTaper, and K-files in oval-shaped canals. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy-five extracted human mandibular central incisors with oval-shaped root canals were selected. A radiopaque contrast medium (Metapex; Meta Biomed Co. Ltd., Chungcheongbuk-do, Korea) was introduced into the canal systems and the self-adjusting file (SAF), WaveOne, Reciproc, ProTaper, and K-files were used for the instrumentation of the canals. The percentage of removed contrast medium was calculated using pre- and post-operative radiographs. RESULTS: An overall comparison between the groups revealed that the hand file (HF) and SAF groups presented the lowest percentage of removed contrast medium, whereas the WaveOne group showed the highest percentage (P < 0.001). The ProTaper group removed more contrast medium than the SAF and HF groups (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: None of the instruments was able to remove the contrast medium completely. WaveOne performed significantly better than other groups. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2014 /pmc/articles/PMC4144129/ /pubmed/25202211 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/1305-7456.137636 Text en Copyright: © European Journal of Dentistry http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Topcu, K. Meltem Karatas, Ertugrul Ozsu, Damla Ersoy, Ibrahim Efficiency of the Self Adjusting File, WaveOne, Reciproc, ProTaper and hand files in root canal debridement |
title | Efficiency of the Self Adjusting File, WaveOne, Reciproc, ProTaper and hand files in root canal debridement |
title_full | Efficiency of the Self Adjusting File, WaveOne, Reciproc, ProTaper and hand files in root canal debridement |
title_fullStr | Efficiency of the Self Adjusting File, WaveOne, Reciproc, ProTaper and hand files in root canal debridement |
title_full_unstemmed | Efficiency of the Self Adjusting File, WaveOne, Reciproc, ProTaper and hand files in root canal debridement |
title_short | Efficiency of the Self Adjusting File, WaveOne, Reciproc, ProTaper and hand files in root canal debridement |
title_sort | efficiency of the self adjusting file, waveone, reciproc, protaper and hand files in root canal debridement |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4144129/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25202211 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/1305-7456.137636 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT topcukmeltem efficiencyoftheselfadjustingfilewaveonereciprocprotaperandhandfilesinrootcanaldebridement AT karatasertugrul efficiencyoftheselfadjustingfilewaveonereciprocprotaperandhandfilesinrootcanaldebridement AT ozsudamla efficiencyoftheselfadjustingfilewaveonereciprocprotaperandhandfilesinrootcanaldebridement AT ersoyibrahim efficiencyoftheselfadjustingfilewaveonereciprocprotaperandhandfilesinrootcanaldebridement |