Comparison of the cleaning capacity of Mtwo and ProTaper rotary systems and manual instruments in primary teeth

Azar, Mohammad Reza; Safi, L; Nikaein, Afshin

doi:10.4103/1735-3327.95227

Cited by 79 publications

(76 citation statements)

References 23 publications

(46 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Kummer et al, proved the manual instrumentation removed more dentine when compared with rotary instruments in primary teeth [20]. Azar et al, reported no significant differences in cleaning efficiency between Manual K-files and the Mtwo and ProTaper rotary systems in primary teeth [21].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Computed Tomographic Evaluation of K3 Rotary and Stainless Steel K File Instrumentation in Primary Teeth

Selvakumar

Swaminathan

Thomas³

et al. 2016

JCDR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Computed Tomographic Evaluation of K3 Rotary and Stainless Steel K File Instrumentation in Primary Teeth

Selvakumar

Swaminathan

Thomas³

et al. 2016

JCDR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…On the other hand, rotary instrumentation dramatically reduces the working time, which is a very interesting aspect to consider for pediatric patients (1,(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mechanical Preparation Showed Superior Shaping Ability than Manual Technique in Primary Molars - A Micro-Computed Tomography Study

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of the study was to evaluate canal preparation in primary molars with hand files, ProTaper Next and Self-Adjusting File (SAF) by 2D and 3D micro-computed tomography (micro-CT) analysis. Canals of 24 primary molars were prepared with hand files (HF), ProTaper Next (PTN) and SAF (n=8/group). The teeth were scanned before and after root canal preparation and the pre-and postoperative micro-CT images were reconstructed. Changes in 2D (area, perimeter, roundness, minor and major diameter) and 3D [volume, surface area, structure model index (SMI)] morphological parameters, as well as canal transportation and lateral perforations were evaluated (Kruskal-Wallis and ANOVA; α=0.05). SAF presented smaller changes in minor diameter, volume and surface area compared with HF and PTN (p<0.05). PTN presented more circular canals after preparation. 3D analysis revealed greater transportation in HF. PTN and SAF presented more centered canal preparation, especially in curved areas. SAF and HF presented, respectively, the lowest (0.05±0.02 and 0.07±0.04) and highest (0.14±0.11 and 0.29±0.17) apical transportation. There were fewer lateral perforations in SAF (4.2%) and PTN (7.7%) than in HF (47.8%) (p<0.05). In primary molars, mechanical preparation showed better shaping ability than hand files, promoting more centered preparations and lower occurrence of lateral perforations and canal transportation. Clinical Relevance: Manual instrumentation is still reported as the main choice in the primary teeth preparation; however, studies have shown limitations in its use. The morphological characteristics of primary teeth and the limited knowledge of shaping procedures in these teeth using mechanical preparation become a challenge for clinical practice and might impair the predictability of endodontic treatment.

show abstract

“…Access cavity preparation was done using endo access bur to obtain straight line access, unroofing of the chamber was done and the pulp extripation was done for both the groups [13]. In Group 1, the root canals were instrumented manually with K-files with the step-back technique up to file ISO size 30 [14], and in Group 2 initially a glide path was prepared to allow free insertion of a #20 K-file to its working length, which allowed free insertion of the SAF to the full length of prepared canal [13].…”

Section: Root Canal Preparationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In Group 1, the root canals were instrumented manually with K-files with the step-back technique up to file ISO size 30 [14], and in Group 2 initially a glide path was prepared to allow free insertion of a #20 K-file to its working length, which allowed free insertion of the SAF to the full length of prepared canal [13].…”

Section: Root Canal Preparationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…5 mA, field of view 8x8, and the sections were taken at coronal, middle and apical level of the root (Figure 1) [13]. The measurements of the canal before and after root canal preparation was done voxel by voxel wherein, M1 is the measurement of the quantity of voxels from the external surface of the mesial portion of the root to the mesial wall of the noninstrumented canal, M2 is the measurement of the quantity of voxels from the external root surface of the mesial portion of the root to the wall of the canal after instrumentation, D1 is the measurement of the quantity of voxels of the external surface of the distal portion of the root to the distal wall of the non-instrumented canal, D2 is the measurement of the quantity of voxels from the external surface of the distal portion of the root to the distal surface of the canal after instrumentation [13]. Canal transportation (CT) was calculated from the following equation [12].…”

Section: Cbctmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Cone Beam Computed Tomographic Analysis of Root Canal Preparations in Deciduous Teeth Using Self Adjusting Files- An In Vitro Study

Gn¹

2017

Austin J Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The complex root canal anatomy of primary root canals is considered to be most challenging. Most of the root canal instruments available till date are ineffective in cleaning the root canal in three dimensions. Self Adjusting File (SAF) system was recently introduced. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare remaining root thickness, centering ability, canal transportation and instrumentation time of Hand files and Self adjusting files in primary root canals using a Cone Beam Computed Tomographic (CBCT) analysis.Study Design: This is an experimental, in vitro, intergroup study. Material and Methods:Twenty eight extracted human primary teeth with minimum 7 mm root length were randomly divided into two groups (Group 1-Hand K-files, Group 2-SAF) were included in the study. CBCT images were taken before and after the instrumentation for each group. Remaining Dentin thickness, centering ability, canal transportation and instrumentation times were evaluated for each group.Results: A significant difference was found in instrumentation time and canal transportation between Hand K-Files and SAF. Self adjusting files showed less canal transportation as compared to Hand K-Files and the mean instrumentation time of 'Self Adjusting Files' was significantly less than 'Hand K-Files'. Conclusion: Self adjusting files system was found to be faster with much less errors in shaping the root canals of primary teeth and can hence be recommended for shaping the root canals of primary teeth.

show abstract

Comparison of the cleaning capacity of Mtwo and ProTaper rotary systems and manual instruments in primary teeth

Cited by 79 publications

References 23 publications

Computed Tomographic Evaluation of K3 Rotary and Stainless Steel K File Instrumentation in Primary Teeth

Computed Tomographic Evaluation of K3 Rotary and Stainless Steel K File Instrumentation in Primary Teeth

Mechanical Preparation Showed Superior Shaping Ability than Manual Technique in Primary Molars - A Micro-Computed Tomography Study

A Cone Beam Computed Tomographic Analysis of Root Canal Preparations in Deciduous Teeth Using Self Adjusting Files- An In Vitro Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About