32 Endodontics
Comparison of the shaping ability of various nickel–titanium file systems in simulated curved canals Dr. Mothanna Alrahabi 1 mrahabi@taibahu.edu.sa
Dr. Ayman Alkady 2
1,2 Department of Restorative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Taibah University, Al Madinah Al Munawwarah, Saudi Arabia
Abstract Aim The aim of this study was to compare the shaping time and shaping ability of the ProTa‑ per Universal, ProTaper Next, WaveOne, and Twisted Files (TF) nickel–titanium (NiTi) systems. Materials and Methods This study was conducted using simulated root canals (n = 40). The specimens were divided into four experimental groups (n = 10 each). Each group prepared by NiTi system as follow‑ ing: ProTaper Universal, ProTaper Next, and Wa‑ veOne, the canals were injected with black ink before instrumentation, a series of photographs of each canal was saved to a computer using a set protocol. The canals were reinjected using red ink postoperatively to define their outlines, and images were taken in the same standardized manner. Photoshop software was used to super‑ impose pre‑ and post‑instrumentation images in two different layers. Each 1 mm step from the apical end was measured using ImageJ Software and evaluated by measuring the amount of re‑ moved resin. The data were analyzed using SPSS version 20.0. Significance was set at P < 0.05. Results There were significant differences (P < 0.05) in shaping time (in seconds) among the NiTi sys‑ tems where the shortest preparation time was with TF system. There were significant differ‑ ences (P < 0.05) in canal transportation values among NiTi systems. Canal transportation at D1, D2, D3, D5, and D7 was greater for the TF sys‑ tem than for the other systems (ProTaper Univer‑ sal, ProTaper Next, and WaveOne).
Dental News, Volume XXIV, Number II, 2017
The transportation with the TF System was to‑ ward the outside of the curvature, and it was greater than that with other systems at D1, D2, D5, and D7. Conclusions ProTaper Universal, ProTaper Next, and WaveOne preserved the original curvature of the canal bet‑ ter than the TF system. Keywords Nickel–titanium, ProTaper Next, ProTaper Univer‑ sal, shaping, simulated canal, WaveOne
Introduction Root canal shaping is considered an essential step in endodontic treatment. 1 According to Schilder,2 the preferred shape of the canal after mechanical shaping is a tapering funnel following the original shape and curvature of the canal, while keeping the original position of the foramen, and keep‑ ing it as small as practically possible. Tradition‑ ally, stainless steel instruments have been used to achieve these objectives. The classic method of using stainless steel instru‑ ments to shape the canal from the apical end to the coronal part does not achieve Schilder’s mechanical objectives of root canal shaping in curved canals and can cause iatrogenic dam‑ age to the original shape of the canal 3 such as straightening a curved canal, transportation, zip‑ ping, ledging, and root perforations. 4,5 Stainless steel instruments’ stiffness is considered the main cause of these procedural errors. 6 The introduction of nickel–titanium (NiTi) instruments to the endodontic field has revolutionized end‑