Gaurav Sharma1, Pooja Kakkar2, Asit Vats3. 1. Senior Resident, Department of Conservative Dentistry & Endodontics, Sardar Patel Post Graduate Institute of Dental and Medical Sciences , Rai Bareilly Road, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India . 2. Professor and Head, Department of Conservative Dentistry & Endodontics, Sardar Patel Post Graduate Institute of Dental and Medical Sciences , Rai Bareilly Road, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India . 3. Reader, Department of Conservative Dentistry & Endodontics, Sardar Patel Post Graduate Institute of Dental and Medical Sciences , Rai Bareilly Road, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India .
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare the smear layer formed on root canal walls during canal preparation of extracted human teeth by Twisted, Mtwo, and ProTaper rotary nickel titanium instruments. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty single rooted human premolar teeth with root curvature <25(0) were selected and randomly divided into three Groups (n= 20 teeth per Group). Three types of rotary nickel titanium instruments were used, Twisted (SybronEndo, Orange, CA, USA), Mtwo (VDW, Munich, Germany) and ProTaper (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland) according to manufacturer's instructions to instrument the root canals. Irrigation for all groups was performed after each instrument change with 3ml of 3% sodium hypochlorite followed by Glyde (File Prep, Dentsply, Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland) as chelator paste and lubricant. Three different areas (coronal, middle and apical thirds) of the root canal were evaluated using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The canal wall of each sample was assessed and compared using a predefined scale for the presence or absence of smear layer. Data were analysed statistically using ANOVA and Tukey HSD test Results: All three groups showed statistically significant more smear layer in the apical thirds of the canal as compared to the coronal and middle thirds (p<0.001). Mtwo rotary file system produced significantly less smear layer (p<0.001) compared to Twisted and ProTaper rotary instruments in the apical portion. Twisted Files resulted in less smear layer formation in the apical thirds of the canal compared to ProTaper rotary instruments but were statistically insignificant. CONCLUSION: Completely clean root canals were not found after instrumentation with any of the three instruments. Under the confines of this study Mtwo instruments produced significantly cleaner dentin wall surfaces throughout the canal length in comparison to Twisted and ProTaper rotary files. Twisted Files proved to be comparable to ProTaper rotary instruments with respect to canal cleanliness in the apical thirds of the root canal.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare the smear layer formed on root canal walls during canal preparation of extracted human teeth by Twisted, Mtwo, and ProTaper rotary nickel titanium instruments. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty single rooted human premolar teeth with root curvature <25(0) were selected and randomly divided into three Groups (n= 20 teeth per Group). Three types of rotary nickel titanium instruments were used, Twisted (SybronEndo, Orange, CA, USA), Mtwo (VDW, Munich, Germany) and ProTaper (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland) according to manufacturer's instructions to instrument the root canals. Irrigation for all groups was performed after each instrument change with 3ml of 3% sodium hypochlorite followed by Glyde (File Prep, Dentsply, Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland) as chelator paste and lubricant. Three different areas (coronal, middle and apical thirds) of the root canal were evaluated using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The canal wall of each sample was assessed and compared using a predefined scale for the presence or absence of smear layer. Data were analysed statistically using ANOVA and Tukey HSD test Results: All three groups showed statistically significant more smear layer in the apical thirds of the canal as compared to the coronal and middle thirds (p<0.001). Mtwo rotary file system produced significantly less smear layer (p<0.001) compared to Twisted and ProTaper rotary instruments in the apical portion. Twisted Files resulted in less smear layer formation in the apical thirds of the canal compared to ProTaper rotary instruments but were statistically insignificant. CONCLUSION: Completely clean root canals were not found after instrumentation with any of the three instruments. Under the confines of this study Mtwo instruments produced significantly cleaner dentin wall surfaces throughout the canal length in comparison to Twisted and ProTaper rotary files. Twisted Files proved to be comparable to ProTaper rotary instruments with respect to canal cleanliness in the apical thirds of the root canal.
Authors: Mahmoud Torabinejad; Robert Handysides; Abbas Ali Khademi; Leif K Bakland Journal: Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod Date: 2002-12
Authors: Ângelo José da Silva Beraldo; Rogério Vieira Silva; Alberto Nogueira da Gama Antunes; Frank Ferreira Silveira; Eduardo Nunes Journal: Iran Endod J Date: 2017