| Literature DB >> 36013584 |
Neslihan Yılmaz Çırakoğlu1, Ersan Çiçek2, Cevat Özarpa3, Yağız Özbay1, Olcay Özdemir1.
Abstract
Introduction The purpose of this research is to assess the wearing of the rotary file system (Protaper Next) and reciprocating file systems (Reciproc Blue and WaveOne Gold) at different lengths using a novel technique after in vivo clinical use. Materials and Methods Twelve different unused samples from each brand were accepted as reference values. For three different brands, the diameters of the files were measured by taking 12 samples used once, 12 samples used twice, and 12 samples used three times. Images were taken with a USB Micron Microscope, and file diameters were measured by determining limit values with Autocad. Result Reciproc Blue system was the most worn at apical 1 mm, and WaveOne Gold system was the most worn at apical 3 mm. PTN system exhibited the least wearing at any length. Moreover, less wearing was observed in the rotation motion than in the reciprocating motion. Conclusion In clinical practice, for the guttapercha to be fully adapted to the apical construction prepared according to the determined WL, the file should not undergo any wearing and volume reduction. Wearing-especially in the apical parts of the file-causes less preparation, and this situation could lead to apically obturation failure.Entities:
Keywords: USB Micron Microscope; cone fitting; file deterioration; wear
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36013584 PMCID: PMC9416307 DOI: 10.3390/medicina58081117
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Medicina (Kaunas) ISSN: 1010-660X Impact factor: 2.948
Figure 1Stages of evaluation of wear of files caused by instrumentation.
Measurements for at 1 mm from apical (mean ± SD).
| Usage/Groups | PTN | WOG | RCB |
|---|---|---|---|
| First | 0.00628 ± 0.00249 a,A | 0.017600 ± 0.001996 d,B | 0.03664 ± 0.02109 a,B |
| Second | 0.01756 ± 0.01183 b,C | 0.03928 ± 0.00701 e,D | 0.0576 ± 0.0288 g,D |
| Third | 0.03518 ± 0.01435 c,E | 0.07028 ± 0.00782 f,F | 0.10530 ± 0.01692 h,G |
Different characters indicate statistically significant difference (p < 0.05).
Measurements for at 3 mm from apical (mean ± SD).
| Usage/Groups | PTN | WOG | RCB |
|---|---|---|---|
| First | 0.02998 ± 0.01770 a,A | 0.04776 ± 0.01959 c,B | 0.01516 ± 0.00359 f,A |
| Second | 0.04302 ± 0.02049 a,b,C | 0.0859 ± 0.0539 d,D | 0.0249 ± 0.0283 f,g,C |
| Third | 0.0953 ± 0.043 b,E | 0.1354 ± 0.0850 e,E | 0.03008 ± 0.00511 g,F |
Different characters indicate statistically significant difference (p < 0.05).
Measurements for at 5 mm from apical (mean ± SD).
| Usage/Groups | PTN | WOG | RCB |
|---|---|---|---|
| First | 0.0419 ± 0.0580 | 0.03750 ± 0.01948 | 0.1011 ± 0.0680 |
| Second | 0.0740 ± 0.0710 | 0.1143 ± 0.0751 | 0.1168 ± 0.1022 |
| Third | 0.0897 ± 0.0589 | 0.1236 ± 0.1034 | 0.1349 ± 0.0989 |
There existed no statistically significant difference between file groups (p > 0.05).
Figure 2Comparison of the average wear values of the files were measured at 1st millimeter from the apical compared to the file that was never used between different file systems.
Figure 3Comparison of the average wear values of the files were measured at 3rd millimeter from the apical compared to the file that was never used between different file systems.
Figure 4Comparison of the average wear values of the files were measured at 5th millimeter from the apical compared to the file that was never used between different file systems.