Abstract
Abstract
Background
This study aimed at assessing the effect of different kinematics as well as different instrument designs on efficiency of cutting of two heat-treated nickel–titanium systems. Forty resin canals with 30°-angle of curvature and a length of 16 mm were utilized in this research. They were divided into four groups depending on the instrument and the operating kinematic, group I; Azure rotary system in rotation motion, group II; Azure rotary system in Reciprocation motion, group III; Fanta AF One rotary system in rotation motion and group IV; Fanta AF One rotary system in reciprocation motion. Blocks were labeled and then weighed pre- and post-preparation with delta weight (Δ wt = wt pre − wt post) and data were documented for statistics evaluation.
Results
Resin canals prepared using Fanta AF One rotary system showed significantly higher weight loss than Azure rotary system in both rotation and reciprocation (P < 0.001). Insignificant difference was reported for rotation and reciprocation movements in both file systems.
Conclusion
The instrument’s cross section revealed a more significant impact on cutting efficiency than the motion used.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference33 articles.
1. Almanei KK (2018) Quality of root canal treatment of molar teeth provided by Saudi dental students using hand and rotary preparation techniques: pilot study. Saudi Endod J 8:1–6
2. Al-Omari MA, Dummer PM, Newcombe RG, Doller R (1992) Comparison of six files to prepare simulated root canals 2. Int Endod J 25:67–81
3. Bergmans L, van Cleynenbreugel J, Wevers M, Lambrechts P (2001) Mechanical root canal preparation with NiTi rotary instruments: rationale, performance and safety—status report for the American Journal of Dentistry. Am J Dent 14:324–333
4. Bryant S, Thompson S, Al-Omari M (1998) Shaping ability of ProFile rotary nickel-titanium instruments with ISO sized tips in simulated root canals: part 1. Int Endod J 31:275–281
5. Bürklein S, Hinschitza K, Dammaschke T, Schäfer E (2012) Shaping ability and cleaning effectiveness of two single-file systems in severely curved root canals of extracted teeth: Reciproc and WaveOne versus Mtwo and ProTaper. Int Endod J 45:449–461