Home Print this page Email this page Users Online: 805
Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2020  |  Volume : 10  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 56-60

Cutting efficiency and dentinal defects using two single-file continuous rotary nickel–titanium instruments


Department of Operative Dentistry and Endodontics, Faculty of Odonto-Stomatology, University of Medicine and Pharmacy at Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Khoa Van Pham
652 Nguyen Trai Street, Ward 11, District 5, Ho Chi Minh City
Vietnam
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/sej.sej_64_19

Rights and Permissions

Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the cutting efficiency and dentinal defect rates using two single-file continuous rotary nickel–titanium instruments. Materials and Methods: Thirty-two resin endo training blocks and 48 mesiobuccal roots of extracted human first lower molars were divided into five groups (16 for each group). Roots were checked for the homogeneities of root canal dimensions, thickness of dentin walls, and curvatures using images of X-ray radiographs on AUTOCAD software. Two groups of resin blocks and two groups of mesiobuccal canals were instrumented using two continuous rotary nickel–titanium instruments (Neoniti A1 and OneShape), the remaining group (control group) of mesiobuccal canals was left intact. The cutting efficiencies of instruments were quotients of the loss weights of specimens, and the time needed for instrumentation. ANOVA and post hoc Tukey tests were used to analyze the differences among the experimental groups. The cracks on the sectioned root surfaces at 3-, 6-, and 9-mm levels were recorded. Fisher exact test was used to analyze the differences among the experimental groups. Results: Cutting efficiency of OneShape was greater than that of Neoniti on both resin and human root canals (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference between dentinal defects created at different levels of canals by two kinds of nickel–titanium instruments (P > 0.05). Conclusions: OneShape instrument was more efficient than Neoniti on both kinds of root canals. Both instruments created dentinal defects on root canal walls.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed78    
    Printed2    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded23    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal