Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Clin Exp Dent. 2017 Aug 1;9(8):e939-e944. doi: 10.4317/jced.52977. eCollection 2017 Aug.

Comparison of the root canal debridement ability of two single file systems with a conventional multiple rotary system in long oval-shaped root canals: In vitro study.

Author information

1
Assistant Professor, Department of Endodontics, Dental School, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran.
2
Assistant Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Dental School, Dental Research Center, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran.
3
Assistant Professor, Department of Endodontics, Dental School, Kashan University of Medical Sciences, Kashan, Iran.
4
Assistant Professor, Modeling of Noncommunicable Disease Research Center, Department of Biostatistics, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran.
5
Postgraduate Student of Endodontics, Department of Endodontics, Dental School, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

This study sought to compare the root canal debridement ability of Neolix, Reciproc and ProTaper rotary systems in long oval-shaped root canals.

MATERIAL AND METHODS:

Eighty five extracted single-rooted human teeth with long oval-shaped single root canals were selected and divided into three experimental groups(n=25) and one control group (n= 10). Root canals were filled with Vitapex radiopaque contrast medium and prepared with Neolix, Reciproc or ProTaper systems. The control group only received irrigation. Digital radiographs were obtained at baseline and postoperatively and subjected to digital subtraction. The percentage of reduction in contrast medium was quantified at 0-5 mm and 5-10 mm distances from the apex. The data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and t-test.

RESULTS:

The mean percentage of the contrast medium removed was not significantly different in the 0-5mm segment among the three groups (P=0.6). In the 5-10mm segment a significant difference was found in this regard among the ProTaper and Reciproc groups (P=0.02) and the highest mean percentage of contrast medium was removed by ProTaper. But, difference between ProTaper and Neolix as well as Neolix and Reciproc was not significant. In Neolix (P=0.024) and Reciproc (P=0.002) systems, the mean percentage of the contrast medium removed from the 0-5mm segment was significantly greater than that in 5-10mm segment; however, this difference was not significant in ProTaper group (P=0.069).

CONCLUSIONS:

Neolix single-file system may be a suitable alternative to ProTaper multiple-file system in debridement of long oval shaped canals. Key words:Root Canal Preparation, Debridement, Root Canal Therapy.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of interest statement:The authors have declared that no conflict of interest exist.

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center