UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Microtomography-based comparison of reciprocating single-file F2 ProTaper technique versus rotary full sequence


Paqué, F; Zehnder, M; De-Deus, G (2011). Microtomography-based comparison of reciprocating single-file F2 ProTaper technique versus rotary full sequence. Journal of Endodontics, 37(10):1394-1397.

Abstract

Introduction

A preparation technique with only 1 single instrument was proposed on the basis of the reciprocating movement of the F2 ProTaper instrument. The present study was designed to quantitatively assess canal preparation outcomes achieved by this technique.
Methods

Twenty-five extracted human mandibular first molars with 2 separate mesial root canals were selected. Canals were randomly assigned to 1 of the 2 experimental groups: group 1, rotary conventional preparation by using ProTaper, and group 2, reciprocate instrumentation with 1 single ProTaper F2 instrument. Specimens were scanned initially and after root canal preparation with an isotropic resolution of 20 μm by using a micro–computed tomography system. The following parameters were assessed: changes in dentin volume, percentage of shaped canal walls, and degree of canal transportation. In addition, the time required to reach working length with the F2 instrument was recorded.
Results

Preoperatively, there were no differences regarding root canal curvature and volume between experimental groups. Overall, instrumentation led to enlarged canal shapes with no evidence of preparation errors. There were no statistical differences between the 2 preparation techniques in the anatomical parameters assessed (P > .01), except for a significantly higher canal transportation caused by the reciprocating file in the coronal canal third. On the other hand, preparation was faster by using the single-file technique (P < .01).
Conclusions

Shaping outcomes with the single-file F2 ProTaper technique and conventional ProTaper full-sequence rotary approach were similar. However, the single-file F2 ProTaper technique was markedly faster in reaching working length.

Abstract

Introduction

A preparation technique with only 1 single instrument was proposed on the basis of the reciprocating movement of the F2 ProTaper instrument. The present study was designed to quantitatively assess canal preparation outcomes achieved by this technique.
Methods

Twenty-five extracted human mandibular first molars with 2 separate mesial root canals were selected. Canals were randomly assigned to 1 of the 2 experimental groups: group 1, rotary conventional preparation by using ProTaper, and group 2, reciprocate instrumentation with 1 single ProTaper F2 instrument. Specimens were scanned initially and after root canal preparation with an isotropic resolution of 20 μm by using a micro–computed tomography system. The following parameters were assessed: changes in dentin volume, percentage of shaped canal walls, and degree of canal transportation. In addition, the time required to reach working length with the F2 instrument was recorded.
Results

Preoperatively, there were no differences regarding root canal curvature and volume between experimental groups. Overall, instrumentation led to enlarged canal shapes with no evidence of preparation errors. There were no statistical differences between the 2 preparation techniques in the anatomical parameters assessed (P > .01), except for a significantly higher canal transportation caused by the reciprocating file in the coronal canal third. On the other hand, preparation was faster by using the single-file technique (P < .01).
Conclusions

Shaping outcomes with the single-file F2 ProTaper technique and conventional ProTaper full-sequence rotary approach were similar. However, the single-file F2 ProTaper technique was markedly faster in reaching working length.

Citations

35 citations in Web of Science®
42 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Downloads

461 downloads since deposited on 26 Jan 2012
40 downloads since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > Center for Dental Medicine > Clinic for Preventive Dentistry, Periodontology and Cariology
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Language:English
Date:2011
Deposited On:26 Jan 2012 11:07
Last Modified:05 Apr 2016 15:20
Publisher:Elsevier
ISSN:0099-2399
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2011.06.031
PubMed ID:21924189

Download

[img]
Preview
Content: Accepted Version
Language: English
Filetype: PDF
Size: 462kB
View at publisher

TrendTerms

TrendTerms displays relevant terms of the abstract of this publication and related documents on a map. The terms and their relations were extracted from ZORA using word statistics. Their timelines are taken from ZORA as well. The bubble size of a term is proportional to the number of documents where the term occurs. Red, orange, yellow and green colors are used for terms that occur in the current document; red indicates high interlinkedness of a term with other terms, orange, yellow and green decreasing interlinkedness. Blue is used for terms that have a relation with the terms in this document, but occur in other documents.
You can navigate and zoom the map. Mouse-hovering a term displays its timeline, clicking it yields the associated documents.

Author Collaborations