|
| ORIGINAL RESEARCH |
 |
|
|
| Year : 2008 |
Volume
: 19 | Issue : 3 | Page
: 182-185 |
|
Apically extruded debris with three contemporary Ni-Ti instrumentation systems: An ex vivo comparative study
Ajay Logani, Naseem Shah
Division of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Center for Dental Education and Research, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi 110 029, India
Correspondence Address:
Ajay Logani
Division of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Center for Dental Education and Research, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi 110 029
India
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None  | Check |
DOI: 10.4103/0970-9290.42947
|
|
|
Aim: To comparatively evaluate the amount of apically extruded debris when ProTaper hand, ProTaper rotary and ProFile systems were used for the instrumentation of root canals.
Materials and Methods: Thirty minimally curved, mature, human mandibular premolars with single canals were randomly divided into three groups of ten teeth each. Each group was instrumented using one of the three instrumentation systems: ProTaper hand, ProTaper rotary and ProFile. Five milliliters of sterile water were used as an irrigant. Debris extruded was collected in preweighed polyethylene vials and the extruded irrigant was evaporated. The weight of the dry extruded debris was established by comparing the pre- and postinstrumentation weight of polyethylene vials for each group.
Statistical Analysis: The Kruskal-Wallis nonparametric test and Mann-Whitney U test were applied to determine if significant differences existed among the groups ( P < 0.05).
Results: All instruments tested produced a measurable amount of debris. No statistically significant difference was observed between ProTaper hand and ProFile system ( P > 0.05). Although ProTaper rotary extruded a relatively higher amount of debris, no statistically significant difference was observed between this type and the ProTaper hand instruments ( P > 0.05). The ProTaper rotary extruded significantly more amount of debris compared to the ProFile system ( P < 0.05).
Conclusion: Within the limitations of this study, it can be concluded that all instruments tested produced apical extrusion of debris. The ProTaper rotary extruded a significantly higher amount of debris than the ProFile. |
|
|
|
| [FULL TEXT] [PDF]* |
|
 |
|
Users online:
