Shaping ability of three instrumentation system in moderately curved canals: A micro‐CT study

Abstract

AbstractThis study aims to compare the shaping ability of three systems using micro‐computed tomography (micro‐CT). Moderately‐curved mesial canals of 36 mandibular molars were assigned to three groups (n = 24); Protaper Next (PTN, 0.25, 0.06), WaveOne Gold (WOG, 0.25, 0.07), TruNatomy (TRN, 0.25, 0.04), and instrumentation was performed. Pre‐ and post‐micro‐CT scans were obtained. Canal volume and surface, structure model index (SMI), centroid shift, canal transportation, and untouched canal were analyzed. One‐way ANOVA and Student's t‐test were used for statistics. There was no difference in SMI, centroid shift, and centering ability between the study groups (p > .05). Removed dentin and canal surface changes were lower in TRN, while untouched dentin walls were higher (p < .05). Cross‐sections became more rounded (p < .05), but not significant between groups (p > .05). Considering the removed dentin by TRN, it can be used in critical dentin thickness, such as the danger zone (DZ). PTN, WOG, and WOG kept the original canal course similarly. Untouched dentin by TRN (41%) was wider than PTN and WOG, consequently, meticulous irrigation is recommended. TRN, which provides a controlled increase in canal volume, can be used in thin dentin such as the DZ, however, its use should be supported by copious irrigation and brushing considering the rate of untouched dentin walls.Research Highlights TRN presented a higher untouched dentin wall compared to PTN and WOG. Canal volume and surface changes were the lowest in the TRN group. The centering abilities were similar in PTN, WOG, and TRN.