MARATTO

article · Egyptian Dental Journal /Egyptian Dental Journal

EVALUATION OF THE CLEANING ABILITY OF DIFFERENT ROTARY FILE SYSTEMS AN IN-VITRO SCANNING ELECTRON MICROSCOPIC STUDY

Abstract

Introduction: The present study aimed to compare the smear layer removal and cleaning abilities of the ProTaper Next (PTN), One Shape (OS), and XP Shaper rotary NiTi systems.Materials and Methods: Thirty single-rooted, freshly extracted teeth were selected for this study. Three NiTi file systems were used for mechanical preparation: ProTaper Next files, one shape single file, and an XP Shaper file. The teeth were divided into three groups. In group 1, teeth were prepared in ProTaper Next files; in group 2, teeth were prepared in one shape file; and in group 3, teeth were prepared in an XP Shaper file. Irrigation was carried out with 5.25% NaOCl and 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA). The teeth were longitudinally split into two halves and prepared for evaluation via Scanning Electron Microscope. The presence/absence of the smear layer and the presence/absence of debris at the coronal, middle, and apical thirds of each canal were evaluated via two 5-step scales for scoring. Numeric data were analyzed via the F-test (ANOVA) for normally distributed quantitative variables and the Post Hoc test (Tukey) for pairwise comparisons.Results: A statistically significant difference was detected among the three groups. XP-endo Shaper files showed the best debris and smear layer removal.Conclusions: the XP Shaper files presented the best smear layer and debris removal in the coronal, middle, and apical thirds of the root canal compared with those of the other two groups. One-shape single files resulted in less smear layer removal than did the ProTaper multiple file system

Research topics

  • Industrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection
  • Material Properties and Processing
  • Recycling and Waste Management Techniques

Read the original research

This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.

DOI: 10.21608/edj.2024.316689.3185

Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.

Discussion

Discuss this research

Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.

No discussion yet. Open the first thread.