IADR Abstract Archives
Comparative analysis of shaping abilities in simulated curved canals prepared with One Shape and ProTaper rotary system
Objectives: To compare the difference in angle of canal curvature in resin block after using One Shape and ProTaper rotary systems
To compare the canal width changes in resin block after using One Shape and ProTaper rotary systems
Methods: An in-vitro experimental study was conducted in AKUH dental clinics in three months period. A total of 60 resin blocks were evaluated using non-probability consecutive sampling. Resin blocks were divided into two equal groups. One Shape rotary file was used in one group while ProTaper Next rotary file was used in the second group. Both groups were evaluated before and after instrumentation for angle of curvature (using Schneider’s method) and canal width changes. Data was analyzed using SPSS version 22. Independent sample t-test was used to compare angle of curvature and repeated measure ANOVA was used for canal width changes after using One Shape and ProTaper Next rotary files. Paired sample t-test was used to compare pre and post instrumentation changes in resin blocks.
Results: There was a statistically significant difference between One Shape and ProTaper Next files (p-value <0.001) in changing the canal curvature. ProTaper Next caused more change in canal curvature as compared to One Shape. Furthermore, there was a statistically significant difference in canal width changes between One Shape and ProTaper Next rotary files (p-value <0.01). One Shape files removed more canal material from apical, middle and coronal part of simulated canal as opposed to ProTaper Next file.
Conclusions: ProTaper next file demonstrated a significantly more change in angle of curvature in resin block as compared to One Shape file. The amount of material removed from the canal space was significantly higher with the One Shape file compared to ProTaper Next at the apical, middle and coronal part.
To compare the canal width changes in resin block after using One Shape and ProTaper rotary systems
Methods: An in-vitro experimental study was conducted in AKUH dental clinics in three months period. A total of 60 resin blocks were evaluated using non-probability consecutive sampling. Resin blocks were divided into two equal groups. One Shape rotary file was used in one group while ProTaper Next rotary file was used in the second group. Both groups were evaluated before and after instrumentation for angle of curvature (using Schneider’s method) and canal width changes. Data was analyzed using SPSS version 22. Independent sample t-test was used to compare angle of curvature and repeated measure ANOVA was used for canal width changes after using One Shape and ProTaper Next rotary files. Paired sample t-test was used to compare pre and post instrumentation changes in resin blocks.
Results: There was a statistically significant difference between One Shape and ProTaper Next files (p-value <0.001) in changing the canal curvature. ProTaper Next caused more change in canal curvature as compared to One Shape. Furthermore, there was a statistically significant difference in canal width changes between One Shape and ProTaper Next rotary files (p-value <0.01). One Shape files removed more canal material from apical, middle and coronal part of simulated canal as opposed to ProTaper Next file.
Conclusions: ProTaper next file demonstrated a significantly more change in angle of curvature in resin block as compared to One Shape file. The amount of material removed from the canal space was significantly higher with the One Shape file compared to ProTaper Next at the apical, middle and coronal part.