|
| ORIGINAL RESEARCH |
 |
|
|
| Year : 2009 |
Volume
: 20 | Issue : 4 | Page
: 400-403 |
|
Canal-centring ability of three rotary file systems in simulated curved canals: A comparative study
Zohreh Khalilak1, Kaveh Alavi2, Nahid Mohammad Zadeh Akhlaghi1, Payman Mehrvarzfar1, Bahareh Dadresanfar1
1 Department of Endodontics, Dental School, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
2 Medical School, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Correspondence Address:
Zohreh Khalilak
Department of Endodontics, Dental School, Islamic Azad University, Tehran
Iran
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None  | Check |
DOI: 10.4103/0970-9290.59430
|
|
|
Objective: To compare the canal-centring ability of M two , ProFile and RaCe rotary files, in simulated curved canals.
Materials and Methods: About 30 simulated canals were prepared by M two , ProFile and RaCe rotary files. Pre and post-operative pictures were super-imposed and transportations recorded. Measurements were carried out at five different points: Canal orifice (O); half-way to the orifice in the straight section (HO); the beginning of the curve (BC); the apex of the curve (AC); the end point (EP). Intra- and inter-group comparisons were carried out by Wilcoxon`s signed ranks test and Kruskal-Wallis test respectively, using SPSS 14.0 software.
Results: ProFile did not change canal centricity in any point. RaCe kept centricity at HO, BC, AC and EP. M two changed canal centricity in points BC, AC and EP. M two group kept the centricity significantly less than the other two groups at BC (P = 0.004), AC (P = 0.015) and EP (P = 0.01). There was no significant difference between these three rotary files at HO. However, the difference between RaCe, M two and ProFile was significant at O (P = 0.015).
Conclusion: ProFile and RaCe rotary files remained better centred than M two rotary files |
|
|
|
| [FULL TEXT] [PDF]* |
|
 |
|
Users online:
