Home > Journals > Minerva Stomatologica > Past Issues > Minerva Stomatologica 2008 April;57(4) > Minerva Stomatologica 2008 April;57(4):143-54

CURRENT ISSUE
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Reprints

MINERVA STOMATOLOGICA

A Journal on Dentistry and Maxillofacial Surgery


Official Journal of the Italian Society of Odontostomatology and Maxillofacial Surgery
Indexed/Abstracted in: CAB, EMBASE, Index to Dental Literature, PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Emerging Sources Citation Index


eTOC

 

ORIGINAL ARTICLES  


Minerva Stomatologica 2008 April;57(4):143-54

language: English, Italian

Shaping outcomes using two Ni-Ti rotary instruments in simulated canals

Giovannone T. 1, Migliau G. 1, Bedini R. 2, Ferrari M. 3, Gallottini L. 1

1 Unit of Endodontics Department of Conservative Dentistry Umberto I Policlinical, “La Sapienza” University Rome, Italy
2 Department of Technology and Health Italian National Institute of Health, Rome, Italy
3 Department of Restorative Dentistry and Dental Materials Policlinico Le Scotte, University of Siena Siena, Italy


PDF  


Aim. The aim of this study was to compare the shaping ability of Mtwo and ProTaper instruments in simulated curved root canals in resin blocks.
Methods. The study was carried out using 40 simulated canals in resin blocks, all of which had the same canal diameter (0.70 mm>D>0.20 mm), length (16 mm), and angle of curvature (40°). These 40 canals were divided into 2 groups of 20 specimens. Both before and after instrumentation, all the resin specimens were photographed, and all the canals examined were measured at 4 different points of reference. Using a computer image analysis program, the photographs of corresponding sections were superimposed on one another. In this way we sought to evaluate the shaping ability of these 2 systems in relation to specific portions of the root canal, also with regard to maintenance of original canal curvature. The results were analysed using Student’s t-test.
Results. Both rotary systems were found to respect the original root canal curvature, particularly in the areas most at risk of modification, namely the outer aspect of the curve in the apical third of the canal. The Mtwo instruments caused less transportation of the apex than the ProTaper instruments, but this difference was not statistically significant (P>0.05).
Conclusion. According to the results of this study, both these instruments respected the original canal curvature, particularly in the areas at most risk of modification, and they also showed good shaping ability in curved canals, with minimum transportation of the apex.

top of page

Publication History

Cite this article as

Corresponding author e-mail