| Literature DB >> 27141219 |
Arash Izadi1, Arash Shahravan2, Hoda Shabani Nejad3.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Endodontic K-files are major tools for cleaning and shaping of the root canal systems. As there are various K-files available in Iranian market, the physical properties of the five available brands were investigated to assist the clinician when selecting suitable endodontic K-files according to the intended application.Entities:
Keywords: Corrosion; Debris; Physical Properties; Scanning Electron Microscopy
Year: 2016 PMID: 27141219 PMCID: PMC4841346 DOI: 10.7508/iej.2016.02.008
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Iran Endod J ISSN: 1735-7497
Figure1A) SEM micrograph of a file. Note the cavities on the surface of the file (×250 magnification); B) EDX spectrum of the cavities, C) A #25 Mani instrument under ×250 magnification. The white arrow shows debris in the middle of the file; D) A #25 Larmrose instrument under ×250 magnification. Machinery defects in the middle of the file, E) The flutes of a #25 Mani instrument under ×40 magnification
The number of corroded files and the location of corroded zone along the different brands of k-files
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No | Yes | No | Yes | No | Yes | No | Yes | No | Yes | ||
| 5 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 5 | 1 | 5 | 1 |
|
|
| 5 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 4 | 2 | 5 | 1 | 5 | 1 |
| |
| 4 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 5 | 1 |
| |
| 4 | 2 | 0 | 6 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 4 | 2 |
| |
| 6 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 4 | 2 |
|
|
| 4 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 2 | 4 |
| |
| 5 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 6 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 2 | 4 |
| |
| 4 | 2 | 1 | 5 | 5 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 5 |
| |
| 6 | 0 | 4 | 2 | 5 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 4 |
|
|
| 6 | 0 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 4 |
| |
| 6 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 4 |
| |
| 6 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 5 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 6 |
| |
| 6 | 0 | 5 | 1 | 6 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
|
|
| 4 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 1 |
| |
| 4 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 2 |
| |
| 4 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 3 | 3 |
| |
| 23 | 1 | 14 | 10 | 20 | 4 | 17 | 7 | 14 | 10 |
|
|
| 19 | 5 | 11 | 13 | 19 | 5 | 17 | 7 | 14 | 10 |
| |
| 19 | 5 | 8 | 16 | 17 | 7 | 17 | 7 | 12 | 11 |
| |
| 18 | 6 (25%) | 4 | 20 (83%) | 14 | 10 (41%) | 12 | 12 (50%) | 8 | 16 (66%) |
| |
The location of debris for K-files of different sizes
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No | Yes | No | Yes | No | Yes | No | Yes | No | Yes | ||
| 2 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| #15 |
| 3 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 5 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 5 | 1 |
| |
| 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 4 | 5 | 1 |
| |
| 1 | 5 | 0 | 6 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 6 | 2 | 4 |
| |
| 2 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 5 |
| # 20 |
| 4 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 5 | 2 | 4 |
| |
| 5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 5 | 4 | 2 |
| |
| 2 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 5 |
| |
| 5 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 5 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 4 |
| #25 |
| 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 4 |
| |
| 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 2 |
| |
| 5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 5 |
| |
| 4 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 5 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 4 |
| #30 |
| 4 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 6 | 0 |
| |
| 5 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 5 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 6 | 0 |
| |
| 4 | 2 | 0 | 6 | 1 | 5 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 4 |
| |
| 13 | 11 | 7 | 17 | 8 | 16 | 9 | 15 | 8 | 16 |
| Total |
| 17 | 7 | 5 | 19 | 15 | 9 | 13 | 11 | 15 | 9 |
| |
| 19 | 5 | 4 | 20 | 13 | 11 | 9 | 15 | 19 | 5 |
| |
| 12 | 12 (50%) | 4 | 20 (83%) | 4 | 20 (83%) | 5 | 19 (79%) | 6 | 18 (75%) |
| |
The number and location of machinery defects in the studied files
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| 5 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 5 | 6 | 0 |
|
|
| 5 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0 |
| |
| 5 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 5 | 5 | 1 |
| |
| 3 | 3 | 1 | 5 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 5 | 5 | 1 |
| |
| 6 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 5 | 1 | 6 | 0 |
|
|
| 5 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 6 | 0 |
| |
| 6 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 6 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0 |
| |
| 5 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 0 |
| |
| 5 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 0 |
|
|
| 4 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0 |
| |
| 6 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 5 | 6 | 0 |
| |
| 3 | 3 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 5 | 6 | 0 |
| |
| 6 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 1 |
|
|
| 6 | 0 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 6 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0 |
| |
| 6 | 0 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 6 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 0 |
| |
| 6 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 6 | 2 | 4 | 5 | 1 |
| |
| 22 | 2 | 16 | 8 | 15 | 9 | 11 | 13 | 23 | 1 |
|
|
| 20 | 4 | 10 | 14 | 10 | 14 | 13 | 11 | 24 | 0 |
| |
| 23 | 1 | 11 | 13 | 12 | 12 | 7 | 17 | 23 | 1 |
| |
| 17 | 7 (29%) | 6 | 18 (75%) | 8 | 16 (66%) | 6 | 18 (75%) | 22 | 2 (8%) |
| |
Figure 3The number of flutes in the studied files