期刊
JOURNAL OF ENDODONTICS
卷 46, 期 3, 页码 437-443出版社
ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2019.11.014
关键词
Centering ratio; cone-beam computed tomography; large root canals; ProTaper Next; transportation; XP-endo shaper
Introduction: The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the shaping abilities of the XPS (XP-endo Shaper) and PTN (ProTaper Next) systems by using cone-beam computed tomography on apical, middle, and coronal thirds of the pre-created large canals with different apical sizes. Methods: Seventy-two teeth with single canal were divided into 3 groups, and then large root canals were created with apical diameter #30 (Group 1), #35 (Group 2), or #40 (Group 3) by using hand files. Each group was again divided into 2 experimental groups, and root canals were instrumented with either XPS or PTN. Canals were scanned before and after instrumentation by using cone-beam computed tomography scanner to evaluate mesiodistal transportation, buccolingual transportation, centering ratio, percent increased prepared area (PA) (mm(2)), and percent increased prepared outline (PO) (mm) at 2, 5, and 8 mm from the apex. Data were statistically analyzed, and the significance level was set at P < .05. Results: There were no statistically significant differences in PA, PO, and centering ratio values between instruments in size 30 and size 35. The mean increases in PA and PO (P < .021) were statistically higher with XPS in size 40. PTN had statistically higher buccolingual transportation in size 30 and size 35. XPS had lower mesiodistal transportation values in all 3 apical sizes. Conclusions: PTN system is able to remove the dentin even in cases of increased apical diameter. However, XPS has less canal transportation and better centering ability compared with PTN.
作者
我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。
推荐
暂无数据