Cone Beam Computed Tomography Analysis Of Remaining Dentin Thickness On Instrumenting Extracted Premolars With Different Rotary Niti File Systems- An In-Vitro Study
Main Article Content
Keywords
Cone beam computed tomography, remaining dentin thickness, mandibular premolars, Nickel titanium
Abstract
Aim: The current study aimed at assessing the remaining dentin thickness on instrumenting extracted premolars with various file systems.
Materials And Methods: 30 extracted single rooted mandibular premolars were collected. Access cavity preparation was done and working length determined. Following the pre-cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan, the corresponding file groups were prepared biomechanically. Group I – Protaper Gold, Group II –ProFit S3, and Group III – Neo Endo. Post-CBCT scan was taken and the pre- and post-CBCT scans were compared for remaining dentin thickness. Following the pre-cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan, the corresponding file groups were prepared biomechanically and analyzed with ANOVA (P = 0.001).
Results: Among three different rotary endodontic files, S3 showed minimum reduction in dentin thickness followed by Neo Endo and Protaper Gold and there was a statistical significant difference between intergroups (p=0.01).
Conclusion: ProFit S3 shown to be effective in preserving the remaining dentin thickness as compared to other groups.
References
2. Chaudhary, Nidhi Rathi, Deepti Jawa Singh, Rani Somani, and Shipra Jaidka. 2018. “Comparative Evaluation of Efficiency of Different File Systems in Terms of Remaining Dentin Thickness Using Cone-Beam Computed Tomography: An In Vitro Study.” Contemporary Clinical Dentistry 9 (3): 367–71.
3. Dhingra, Annil, and Deepika Parimoo. 2015. “Evaluation of Remaining Dentine Thickness Using Wave One and One Shape File System with Cone Beam Computed Tomography.” Int J Contemp Dent Med Rev 2014: 3–5.
4. Duque, Jussaro Alves, Rodrigo Ricci Vivan, Bruno Cavalini Cavenago, Pablo Andrés Amoroso-Silva, Ricardo Affonso Bernardes, Bruno Carvalho de Vasconcelos, and Marco Antonio Hungaro Duarte. 2017. “Influence of NiTi Alloy on the Root Canal Shaping Capabilities of the ProTaper Universal and ProTaper Gold Rotary Instrument Systems.” Journal of Applied Oral Science: Revista FOB 25 (1): 27–33.
5. Gagliardi, Jason, Marco Aurélio Versiani, Manoel Damião de Sousa-Neto, Andres Plazas-Garzon, and Bettina Basrani. 2015. “Evaluation of the Shaping Characteristics of ProTaper Gold, ProTaper NEXT, and ProTaper Universal in Curved Canals.” Journal of Endodontia 41 (10): 1718–24.
6. Jain, Aditi, Hemant Asrani, Abhinav Chand Singhal, Taranjeet Kaur Bhatia, Vaibhav Sharma, and Pragya Jaiswal. 2016. “Comparative Evaluation of Canal Transportation, Centering Ability, and Remaining Dentin Thickness between WaveOne and ProTaper Rotary by Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography: An in Vitro Study.” Journal of Conservative Dentistry: JCD 19 (5): 440–44.
7. Kulkarni, Nishita Rajeev, Sharad Basavraj Kamat, Santosh Irappa Hugar, Girish Shankar Nanjannawar, and Pranav Devendra Patil. 2019. “Evaluation of Remaining Dentin Thickness Following Use of Three Different Rotary Nickel-Titanium Retreatment Files: A Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Study.” Journal of Conservative Dentistry: JCD 22 (6): 588–92.
8. Kumar, Tarun, Sunandan Mittal, Vanita Keshav, Ramanjot Kaur, and Ena Maakhni. 2022. “A Comparative Evaluation of Remaining Dentin Thickness Following Biomechanical Preparation of Teeth Using Different Rotary File Systems: An in Vitro Study.” Journal of Conservative Dentistry: JCD 25 (1): 32–36.
9. Lim, S. S., and C. J. Stock. 1987. “The Risk of Perforation in the Curved Canal: Anticurvature Filing Compared with the Stepback Technique.” International Endodontic Journal 20 (1): 33–39.
10. Mangal, Shivani, Sylvia Mathew, B. V. Sreenivasa Murthy, Shruthi Nagaraja, K. Dinesh, and Poornima Ramesh. 2018. “Cone-Beam Computed Tomographic Evaluation of Remaining Dentin Thickness in Bifurcated Roots of Maxillary First Premolars after Rotary Instrumentation and Post Space Preparation: An in Vitro Study.” Journal of Conservative Dentistry: JCD 21 (1): 63–67.
11. Shahriari, Shahriar, Hasan Abedi, Mahdi Hashemi, and Seyed Mohsen Jalalzadeh. 2009. “Comparison of Removed Dentin Thickness with Hand and Rotary Instruments.” Iranian Endodontic Journal 4 (2): 69–73.
12. Singh, Shalini, Muqthadir Siddiqui Mohammed Abdul, Utsav Sharma, Shan Sainudeen, Chayan Jain, and Jacob Tony Kalliath. 2019. “An in Vitro Comparative Evaluation of Volume of Removed Dentin, Canal Transportation, and Centering Ratio of 2Shape, WaveOne Gold, and ProTaper Gold Files Using Cone-Beam Computed Tomography.” Journal of International Society of Preventive & Community Dentistry 9 (5): 481–85.
13. Tomer, Anil K., R. Gupta, A. Behera, N. Mittal, A. A. Raina, M. Ramachandran, and Others. 2018. “An in-Vitro Evaluation of Remaining Dentine Thickness through Cbct Using Different Files.” Int J Appl Dent Sci 4 (3): 9–13.
14. Uppin, Veerendra, Vinaya Varghese, Madhu Pujar, Nirmal Kurian, and Hemant Vagarali. 2016. “Comparison of Canaltransportation and Centering Ability of ProTaper Next, Hyflex Cmandwave One System Using Cone - Beam Computed Tomography-an in-Vitro Study.” Dental Journal of Advance Studies 04 (02): 088–093.
15. Verma, Mudita, N. Meena, R. Anitha Kumari, Sudhanva Mallandur, R. Vikram, and Vishwas Gowda. 2017. “Comparison of Apical Debris Extrusion during Root Canal Preparation Using Instrumentation Techniques with Two Operating Principles: An in Vitro Study.” Journal of Conservative Dentistry: JCD 20 (2): 96–99.
16. Yılmaz Çırakoglu, Neslihan, and Yağız Özbay. 2021. “Apically Extruded Debris Associated with ProTaper Next, ProTaper Gold and TruNatomy Systems: An in Vitro Study.” Journal of Dental Research, Dental Clinics, Dental Prospects 15 (1): 30–34.
Article Sidebar
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
All articles published in JPTCP are licensed under Copyright Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.