Methods: Two different brands (SureEndo and Dentsply) were tested. For both brands, .02 Tapered standard and F3 size paper points (both corresponding to no: 30) were used. An endodontic acrylic block was prepared with ProTaper F3 NiTi file as a finisher file, so that the final taper of the prepared canals matched with those of the F3 paper points. Twenty absorbent paper points from each group were selected. The paper points were assigned into two sub-groups (n=10/group) according to immersion period: 5 sec and 30 sec. Each dry absorbent paper point was weighed using an electronic precision scale. Thereafter, each paper point was immersed in the prepared canal of the acrylic block containing water. The paper point was weighted again. For each paper point, the amount of fluid absorbency was calculated by subtracting pre- and post- water immersion values. Statistical analysis was performed using repeated measures of ANOVA at p<0.001. Results: The differences between 5- and 30-s absorbance values were significant for each group (p < 0.001). The brands of paper points tested had no significant effect on absorbency (p= 0.555). A statistically-significant ranking for fluid absorbency values was obtained as follows: F3 > .02 tapered standard.
Conclusion: Application time and taper of paper points may prove to be very important when absorbency properties of paper points are considered.