| Literature DB >> 29429057 |
Miki Sekiya1, Munehiro Maeda2, Ichiroh Katsuumi2, Masaru Igarashi2.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate four instruments with different working motion for preparation of a C-shaped single canal wall using the same artificial plastic models reproduced from a human tooth. One tooth with root canal morphology C1 (the shape is an uninterrupted "C" with no separation or division) was selected among three-dimensional micro-computed tomography (micro-CT) imaging data of extracted human teeth. Imaging data were then converted into STL form data, and twenty-four C-shaped root canal model blocks were manufactured using this STL form data. These blocks were randomly divided into four groups of six blocks each and instrumented as follows: stainless steel K-files (SSK), Self-Adjusting File (SAF), ProTaper NEXT (PTN) and RECIPROC (REC). Micro-CT images taken before and after canal preparation were superimposed, and instrumented canal area, percentage of instrumented canal area, part of instrumented canal area, volume of instrumented canal and time taken for instrumentation were evaluated for each group. The greatest instrumented canal area, percentage of instrumented canal area and volume of instrumented canal were as follows (in decreasing order): SSK > SAF > PTN > REC (P < 0.05). The longest time taken for instrumentation was as follows (in decreasing order): SAF > SSK > PTN > REC (P < 0.05). The conscious shaping of SSK and the lattice structure of SAF were instrumented all root canal walls equally. PTN and REC required less time taken for instrumentation, but showed unequal instrumentation.Entities:
Keywords: C-shaped root canal; Canal model block; Micro-CT; Nickel–titanium rotary instruments; Stainless steel instruments
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29429057 PMCID: PMC6153976 DOI: 10.1007/s10266-018-0348-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Odontology ISSN: 1618-1247 Impact factor: 2.634
Fig. 1The morphology of the root canal model block. The diameter of apical foramen is 0.17 mm or less and the root canal length is 10 mm. a from lingual side; b cross sections at 6 mm from the apical foramen; c at 3 mm from the apical foramen
Values of each parameter for root canal preparation by superimposed images (mean ± SD)
| Group | Area | volume (mm3) | Time (min) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Area (mm2) | Percent (%) | |||
|
| ||||
| SSK | 53.20 ± 2.53 | 58.79 ± 3.09 | 2.82 ± 0.21 | 5.78 ± 0.43 |
| SAF | 45.12 ± 4.06 | 50.02 ± 4.58 | 2.46 ± 0.11 | 8.00 ± 0.00 |
| PTN | 32.16 ± 2.80 | 34.86 ± 2.77 | 2.07 ± 0.18 | 2.06 ± 0.11 |
| REC | 25.02 ± 0.90 | 27.47 ± 1.03 | 1.71 ± 0.25 | 0.86 ± 0.06 |
Statistically significant differences were found between all groups of each parameter (P < 0.05)
Fig. 2Comparison of four instruments by each parameter
Fig. 3Superimposed images from root apex side for each group. Red represents the form before canal preparation. Green indicates the areas affected by canal preparation