Evaluation of canal cleanliness of two rotary file systems with different taper systems: An in vitro scanning electron microscopic study

ABSTRACT Aim: This study aims to compare and evaluate the amount of debris and smear layer remaining on the root canal walls prepared with TruNatomy and ProTaper Next files using scanning electron microscope (SEM). Methods: Sixty freshly extracted maxillary premolar teeth with a single root and oval canals were chosen, and decoronated to a standard length of 15 mm. Samples were randomly divided into three groups ( n = 20) and instrumented. Group 1: ProTaper Next files (Dentsply Sirona) till X3, Group 2: Medium-size TruNatomy files (Dentsply Sirona), and Group 3: Gates Glidden drills and hand K files. 2 mL of 5.25% NaOCl was used between instruments. The final irrigation was done using 3 mL of 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid and 3 mL of 5.25% NaOCl with passive ultrasonic agitation for 30 s. Samples were rinsed using distilled water, split mesiodistally, and evaluated under SEM The presence of superficial debris and a smear layer was evaluated using a standard scoring system. Data were statistically analyzed using the Kruskal–Wallis test and the post hoc Dunn’s test, with a level of significance set at P < 0.05. Results: None of the groups demonstrated complete debridement in all three-thirds of the root canal. In both experimental groups, a significant reduction in the amount of debris was seen, whereas there were no significant differences in the smear layer scores. Conclusion: Although ProTaper Next and TruNatomy files performed similarly, utilizing a lesser tapered file system with an optimal irrigation regimen would enhance the debridement ability without unnecessary removal of root dentinal structure.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Endodontology
Published
2024-09-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.4103/endo.endo_245_23
Primary Topic
Endodontics and Root Canal Treatments
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Evaluation of canal cleanliness of two rotary file systems with different taper systems: An in vitro scanning electron microscopic study

Sebeena Mathew, Karthick Kumaravadivel, Sankar Vishwanath, Boopathi Thangavel et al.
1 links
Endodontology
Endodontics and Root Canal Treatments
article

Evaluation of canal cleanliness of two rotary file systems with different taper systems: An in vitro scanning electron microscopic study

Sebeena Mathew, Karthick Kumaravadivel, Sankar Vishwanath, Boopathi Thangavel, Deepa Natesan Thangaraj, Sriram Ravi
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT Aim: This study aims to compare and evaluate the amount of debris and smear layer remaining on the root canal walls prepared with TruNatomy and ProTaper Next files using scanning electron microscope (SEM). Methods: Sixty freshly extracted maxillary premolar teeth with a single root and oval canals were chosen, and decoronated to a standard length of 15 mm. Samples were randomly divided into three groups ( n = 20) and instrumented. Group 1: ProTaper Next files (Dentsply Sirona) till X3, Group 2: Medium-size TruNatomy files (Dentsply Sirona), and Group 3: Gates Glidden drills and hand K files. 2 mL of 5.25% NaOCl was used between instruments. The final irrigation was done using 3 mL of 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid and 3 mL of 5.25% NaOCl with passive ultrasonic agitation for 30 s. Samples were rinsed using distilled water, split mesiodistally, and evaluated under SEM The presence of superficial debris and a smear layer was evaluated using a standard scoring system. Data were statistically analyzed using the Kruskal–Wallis test and the post hoc Dunn’s test, with a level of significance set at P < 0.05. Results: None of the groups demonstrated complete debridement in all three-thirds of the root canal. In both experimental groups, a significant reduction in the amount of debris was seen, whereas there were no significant differences in the smear layer scores. Conclusion: Although ProTaper Next and TruNatomy files performed similarly, utilizing a lesser tapered file system with an optimal irrigation regimen would enhance the debridement ability without unnecessary removal of root dentinal structure.

EndodontologyVol. 36(4)
Kamineni Institute of Dental Sciences (IN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 77%
Endodontics and Root Canal Treatments
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Evaluation of canal cleanliness of two rotary file systems with different taper systems: An in vitro scanning electron microscopic study — Sebeena Mathew, Karthick Kumaravadivel, et al. · Endodontology (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS