Canal Aberration Assessment in Simulated Root Canals: a Comparative Study

AIM: The aim of this study was to compare time of preparation and canal aberrations in a simulated root canals after using three different rotary systems: Endostar E5, Endostar E3 and T One File Gold. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 90 endodontic training blocks were used in this study and divided into three groups consisting of 30 each (n = 30). Blocks processing was performed by thirty dentists without any prior experience in rotary instrumentation techniques. In the first group blocks were prepared using Endostar E5, in second one with Endostar E3 and in third one with T One File Gold system. The preparation time was measured. The postoperative image of each block was taken by stereomicroscope and canal aberrations (ledge and instrument fracture) was recorded. Statistical analysis was done by SPSS software. RESULTS: Instrumentation with T One File Gold system is significantly faster compared to instrumentation with Endostar E5 and Endostar E3 systems (p <0.05). There are no statistically significant differences in the type and number of procedural errors between Endostar E5, Endostar E3 and T One File Gold systems when the operators have no previous experience in rotary instrumentation techniques. CONCLUSION: Under the conditions of this study, the incidence of examined canal aberrations were similar for all tested systems. The preparation time was significantly shorter with single file system.