Send to

Choose Destination
Quintessence Int. 2019;50(5):358-368. doi: 10.3290/j.qi.a42326.

Root canal preparation using S5, Mtwo, and ProTaper Universal nickel-titanium systems: a comparative ex-vivo study.



To examine various parameters of root canal preparation using three rotary nickel-titanium systems (S5, Mtwo, and ProTaper Universal [PTU]).


One hundred and twenty curved root canals were prepared to size 30. The following parameters were evaluated: straightening, changes of root canal cross-section, safety issues, cleanliness of canal walls, and working time. Statistical analysis was performed with the Kruskal-Wallis test, Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test, and analysis of variance (P < .050).


All three systems maintained the curvature well with no significant difference between the groups. With regard to the cross-section, no significant differences for any of the root canal thirds (coronal, P = .589; medial, P = .898; apical, P = .474) were found. Preparation with S5 resulted in two, with Mtwo in one, and with PTU in three procedural incidents. Debris scores 1 and 2 were found in 56% (S5), 46% (Mtwo), and 60% (PTU) of the specimens, respectively. Smear layer scores 1 and 2 were found in 85% (S5), 73% (Mtwo), and 78% (PTU). Results for removal of debris and smear layer were not significantly different between the three groups. Mean working time was significantly shorter for Mtwo (293 seconds) than for S5 (329 seconds) (P = .001) or PTU (369 seconds) (P = .001).


All three systems respected the original root canal curvature well and were safe to use. None of the three systems was able to prepare the entire circumference of the root canals, and to remove debris and smear layer completely.


Mtwo; ProTaper Universal; S5; debris; nickel-titanium rotary systems; smear layer


Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Quintessence Publishing Co., Ltd
Loading ...
Support Center