PURPOSE: To compare the effect of the TF Adaptive, ProTaper Next, OneShape, WaveOne, Reciproc, (SAF) on the reduction of E. faecalis in experimentally infected root canals. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 70 human mandibular incisor teeth with straight roots and single root canals were selected for this experiment and the root canals of the selected teeth were infected with E. faecalis. After contamination, all the root canals were randomly divided into 7 groups: control, ProTaper Next, TF Adaptive, SAF, WaveOne, Reciproc, and OneShape. After the irrigation procedures, samples were taken from root canals with paper points and incubated in blood agar plates. The colonies grown on the blood agar were counted and interpreted as colony forming units per milliliter. RESULTS: Analysis of results showed that all instrumentation systems were more effective in reducing the number of bacteria than the control (P<.001). The ProTaper Next, TF Adaptive, WaveOne, Reciproc, and OneShape systems were significantly more effective than the SAF system in reducing E. faecalis within the root canals (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: All instrumentation systems used in this study provided a significant reduction in bacterial populations.
PURPOSE: To compare the effect of the TF Adaptive, ProTaper Next, OneShape, WaveOne, Reciproc, (SAF) on the reduction of E. faecalis in experimentally infected root canals. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 70 human mandibular incisor teeth with straight roots and single root canals were selected for this experiment and the root canals of the selected teeth were infected with E. faecalis. After contamination, all the root canals were randomly divided into 7 groups: control, ProTaper Next, TF Adaptive, SAF, WaveOne, Reciproc, and OneShape. After the irrigation procedures, samples were taken from root canals with paper points and incubated in blood agar plates. The colonies grown on the blood agar were counted and interpreted as colony forming units per milliliter. RESULTS: Analysis of results showed that all instrumentation systems were more effective in reducing the number of bacteria than the control (P<.001). The ProTaper Next, TF Adaptive, WaveOne, Reciproc, and OneShape systems were significantly more effective than the SAF system in reducing E. faecalis within the root canals (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: All instrumentation systems used in this study provided a significant reduction in bacterial populations.