Clinical, Cosmetic and Investigational Dentistry (Feb 2024)

Comparative Analysis of Three Nickel–Titanium Rotary Files in Severely Curved L-Shaped Root Canals: Preparation Time, Aberrations, and Fracture Rates

  • Almnea RA,
  • Albeaji SMAA,
  • Alelyani AA,
  • AlHarith D,
  • Alshahrani AS,
  • Al Malwi AA,
  • Alobaid MA,
  • Al Moaleem MM

Journal volume & issue
Vol. Volume 16
pp. 1 – 9

Abstract

Read online

Raid Abdullah Almnea,1 Sadun Mohammad Al Ageel Albeaji,2 Ahmed Ali Alelyani,3 Dalia AlHarith,4 Abdulmajeed Saeed Alshahrani,1 Ahmed Abdullah Al Malwi,5 Mohammed A Alobaid,6 Mohammed M Al Moaleem7 1Department of Restorative Dentistry, Division of Endodontics, College of Dentistry, Najran University, Najran, Saudi Arabia; 2Consultant Endodontics, Dental Center, Hafar al Batin, Saudi Arabia; 3Restorative Department, Endodontic Division, College of Dentistry, Najran University, Najran, Saudi Arabia; 4Department of Restorative Dentistry, Riyadh Elm University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia; 5‏Department of Restorative Dentistry, Division of Endodontics, College of Dentistry, King Khalid University, Abha, Saudi Arabia; 6Restorative Dental Science Department & Department of Dental Education, College of Dentistry, King Khalid University, Abha, Saudi Arabia; 7Department of Prosthetic Dental Science, College of Dentistry, Jazan University, Jazan, 45142, Saudi ArabiaCorrespondence: Mohammed M Al Moaleem, Department of Prosthetic Dental Science, College of Dentistry, Jazan University, Jazan, 45142, Saudi Arabia, Tel +966-550599553, Email [email protected]: This simulated study of 30 severely curved L-shaped root canals aimed to compare preparation time, aberrations, width measurements, and fractured files of three nickel–titanium (Ni–Ti) files, namely, ProTaper, ProTaper Next (PTN), and WaveOne (WO).Methods: Thirty simulated L-curved root canals of resin blocks were randomly divided into three groups. The canals were prepared to a tip size of 25 using ProTaper, PTN, and WO rotary file systems. Pre- and post-operative views for each sample were captured by a professional camera at a standardized distance and position. Blue India ink was injected into the pre-operative canals, and red India ink was injected into the post-operative canals to give a clear superimposition image. Five points were assessed through the halfway of the canal to the orifice (area between the beginning of curvature and apical end point). Preparation time, aberrations, width measurements, and fractured files were recorded and analyzed.Results: Mean preparation time was longest in ProTaper (4.89± 0.68 minutes). PTN and WO were the fastest in preparing the canals (about 3 minutes). A statistically significant difference was found between WO and ProTaper & PTN and ProTaper (p=0.000), while the difference was non-significant (p > 0.05) between WO and PTN. Nine aberrations consisting of three zips, one ledge and one outer widening were related to ProTaper, while WO recorded a ledge and fractured file, but for PTN system, it verified an outer widening and ledge. Only one WO file fractured, with no deformation observed in the other instruments. No significance was recorded among the width measurements in the different levels.Conclusion: ProTaper next achieved faster cutting than the ProTaper and WO file systems. PTN maintained the best apical termination position and produced the least canal aberration, followed by WO and ProTaper.Keywords: simulated canal, rotary system, preparation time, canal aberrations, nickel–titanium files, dental pulp cavity, root canal therapy

Keywords