Premium
Centring ability and apical transportation after overinstrumentation with ProTaper Universal and ProFile Vortex instruments
Author(s) -
González Sánchez J. A.,
DuranSindreu F.,
de Noé S.,
Mercadé M.,
Roig M.
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
international endodontic journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.988
H-Index - 119
eISSN - 1365-2591
pISSN - 0143-2885
DOI - 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2011.02008.x
Subject(s) - centring , apical foramen , mathematics , orthodontics , post hoc , dentistry , molar , significant difference , root canal , physics , geometry , engineering , medicine , mechanical engineering , statistics
González Sánchez JA, Duran‐Sindreu F, de Noé S, Mercadé M, Roig M. Centring ability and apical transportation after overinstrumentation with ProTaper Universal and ProFile Vortex instruments. International Endodontic Journal , 45 , 542–551, 2012. Abstract Aim To evaluate morphological changes to the major foramen after overinstrumentation with ProTaper Universal and ProFile Vortex Ni–Ti rotary instruments. Methodology Twenty‐eight mesiobuccal canals of maxillary and mandibular first molars were divided into two groups of 14 canals each. The root canals were prepared with ProTaper Universal or ProFile Vortex instruments. ProTaper and Vortex instruments were used until the file tip protruded 1 mm beyond the working length (0.5 mm beyond the major foramen). The major foramen was photographed before and after overinstrumentation with each file of the two systems used. The images were superimposed and evaluated using Adobe Photoshop. The parameters evaluated were canal transportation, centring ability and shape of the major foramen. Transportation and centring ability were calculated in two directions: the direction of maximum curvature (MC) and a direction vertical to the maximum curvature (VC). Measurements of canal transportation and centring ability were analysed by anova followed by post hoc least significance difference (LSD) multiple comparisons. Results No significant differences were observed amongst the different instruments with respect to centring ability in either direction ( P > 0.05). The F3 ProTaper Universal instrument was associated with a higher mean values for transportation in the direction of MC ( P < 0.05) than the S1, S2 and F1 ProTaper Universal instruments and the size 15, 0.06 taper, size 20, 0.06 taper, and size 25, 0.06 taper ProFile Vortex instruments. The size 30, 0.06 taper ProFile Vortex instrument had a larger mean value for transportation in the direction of MC ( P < 0.05) than the S1 ProTaper Universal and size 15, 0.06 taper ProFile Vortex instruments. The S1, S2, F1, F2 and F3 ProTaper Universal files and the size 15, 0.06 taper, size 20, 0.06 taper, size 25, 0.06 taper, and size 30, 0.06 taper ProFile Vortex files produced an oval foramen in 71%, 71%, 85%, 85%, 71%, 71%, 85%, 85% and 89% of the cases, respectively. Conclusions In most samples, the ProTaper Universal and ProFile Vortex files produced transportation of the major foramen and created an oval‐shaped major foramen after overinstrumentation.