Comparison of the shaping capability of reciprocating instruments in simulated canals in vitro
10.7518/hxkq.2014.06.018
- VernacularTitle:往复运动镍钛锉根管预备成形能力的体外研究
- Author:
Tongfei SHAO
1
;
Xiao-Mei HOU
;
Benxiang HOU
Author Information
1. 首都医科大学附属北京口腔医院牙体牙髓科
- Keywords:
reciprocating movement;
single files;
root canal preparation;
shaping capability
- From:
West China Journal of Stomatology
2014;(6):606-610
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective ??This?study?aims?to?evaluate?the?shaping?capability?of?Reciproc,?WaveOne,?Mtwo,?and?ProTaper?instruments?in?simulated?root?canals. Methods ??A?total?of?40?simulated?resin?blocks?were?divided?randomly?into?four?groups.?Each?group?was?prepared?with?Reciproc?(Group?1),?WaveOne?(Group?2),?Mtwo?(Group?3),?and?ProTaper?(Group?4).?The?pre-paration?time?and?reduction?in?working?length?after?preparation?were?measured.?Pre-?and?post-operative?images?were?obtained?with?a?scanner?and?superimposed?through?Photoshop.?The?changes?in?canal?curvature?and?material?removal?from?the?inner?and?outer?canal?walls?at?10?points?beginning?at?1?mm?from?the?end?point?of?the?canal?were?measured?with?Image?J.?Centering?capability?was?determined?accordingly.?Data?were?analyzed?through?one-way?ANOVA,?SNK,?and?Kruskal–Wallis?at?a?signi-ficance?level?of?P<0.05.?Results ??The?preparation?time?of?Group?2?was?(53.7±6.7)?s,?whereas?those?of?Groups?1,?3,?and?4?were?(86.9±8.1)?s,?(112.2±8.2)?s,?and?(177.9±11.2)?s,?respectively;?the?difference?was?found?to?be?significant?(P<0.05).?The?reduc-tions?in?working?length?among?the?four?groups?after?preparation?were?not?significantly?different?(P>0.05).?The?canal?curvature?for?Groups?1?to?4?were?2.671°±0.637°,?2.667°±0.450°,?3.664°±0.870°,?and?3.797°±0.601°,?respectively.?The?changes?for?Groups 1?and?2?were?significantly?smaller?than?those?for?Groups?3?and?4.?At?the?3?mm?point,?the?transportation?of?Group?1?was?(-0.016± 0.094)?mm,?which?was?significantly?less?than?that?of?the?other?instruments?(P<0.05).?At?the?4?mm?and?5?mm?points,?the?trans-portation?values?of?Group?2?were?(-0.080±0.104)?mm?and?(-0.312±0.088)?mm,?which?were?significantly?less?than?that?of?Group?1?[(-0.243±0.099)?mm,?(-0.404±0.064)?mm,?P<0.05].?Conclusion ??Reciproc?and?WaveOne?can?complete?prepa-ration?faster?and?can?maintain?the?original?canal?curvature?better?than?Mtwo?and?ProTaper.?Reciproc?exhibits?superior?centering?capability?in?the?apical?part?of?the?canal,?whereas?WaveOne?exhibits?superior?centering?capability?in?the?middle?part?of?the?canal.
