Scholarlink

Background <p>The main aim of root canal treatment is to clean and shape root canals while preserving the original canal anatomy. Even with improvements in the manufacturing of NiTi files, maintaining the original canal anatomy in curved root canals is a challenge.</p> Aim of the study <p>This study aimed to compare the shaping ability of three different NiTi files via CBCT to assess mesiodistal and buccolingual canal transportation, canal centering ability, and canal straightening in severely curved canals.</p> Materials and methods <p>Thirty-six human extracted mandibular molars were used in this study, and the samples were randomly divided into three equal groups (<i>n</i> = 12) according to the files used for root canal instrumentation. Preoperative CBCT scans were performed to evaluate the canal position at three different levels: apical, middle, and coronal. Group I: mesiobuccal (MB) canals of each molar were instrumented with Zarc BlueShaper files (Zarc4Endo, Gijon, Spain) up to Z4 file (25/~), Group II: MB canals were instrumented with RCS Rainbow One file (RAMO MEDICAL, Suzhou, China) of size (25/0.06), and Group III: MB canals were instrumented with HyFlex EDM One file (25/~) (Coltene/Whaledent AG, Alstätten, Switzerland). Measurements were performed on Postoperative CBCT scans of instrumented canals to evaluate the canal transportation, centering ability and straightening at the apical, middle and coronal levels.</p> Results <p>HyFlex EDM One demonstrated the most favorable shaping performance, showing minimal transportation, high centering, and least curvature alteration. These outcomes were followed by Zarc BlueShaper and subsequently by RCS Rainbow One. A statistically significant difference was observed in mesiodistal overall centering ability, where RCS Rainbow One exhibited less centering ability than HyFlex EDM One (<i>P</i> = 0.048). However, no statistically significant differences were detected among the three groups regarding mesiodistal canal transportation (<i>P</i> = 0.14), buccolingual canal transportation (<i>P</i> = 0.39), buccolingual centering ability (<i>P</i> = 0.6), or curvature change (<i>P</i> = 0.42).</p> Conclusions <p>Within the limitations of this in vitro study, all the tested rotary systems demonstrated clinically acceptable performance in shaping curved root canals, despite minor differences in canal transportation, centering ability, and canal straightening.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Bidirectional evaluation of canal transportation, centering ability and curvature changes of three NiTi rotary systems using cone beam computed tomography (invitro study)

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年12月17日

查看全文
  • Ahmed A. Soliman,
  • Raef A. Sherif,
  • Amr M. Abdallah,
  • Ahmed M. Mobarak

摘要

Background

The main aim of root canal treatment is to clean and shape root canals while preserving the original canal anatomy. Even with improvements in the manufacturing of NiTi files, maintaining the original canal anatomy in curved root canals is a challenge.

Aim of the study

This study aimed to compare the shaping ability of three different NiTi files via CBCT to assess mesiodistal and buccolingual canal transportation, canal centering ability, and canal straightening in severely curved canals.

Materials and methods

Thirty-six human extracted mandibular molars were used in this study, and the samples were randomly divided into three equal groups (n = 12) according to the files used for root canal instrumentation. Preoperative CBCT scans were performed to evaluate the canal position at three different levels: apical, middle, and coronal. Group I: mesiobuccal (MB) canals of each molar were instrumented with Zarc BlueShaper files (Zarc4Endo, Gijon, Spain) up to Z4 file (25/~), Group II: MB canals were instrumented with RCS Rainbow One file (RAMO MEDICAL, Suzhou, China) of size (25/0.06), and Group III: MB canals were instrumented with HyFlex EDM One file (25/~) (Coltene/Whaledent AG, Alstätten, Switzerland). Measurements were performed on Postoperative CBCT scans of instrumented canals to evaluate the canal transportation, centering ability and straightening at the apical, middle and coronal levels.

Results

HyFlex EDM One demonstrated the most favorable shaping performance, showing minimal transportation, high centering, and least curvature alteration. These outcomes were followed by Zarc BlueShaper and subsequently by RCS Rainbow One. A statistically significant difference was observed in mesiodistal overall centering ability, where RCS Rainbow One exhibited less centering ability than HyFlex EDM One (P = 0.048). However, no statistically significant differences were detected among the three groups regarding mesiodistal canal transportation (P = 0.14), buccolingual canal transportation (P = 0.39), buccolingual centering ability (P = 0.6), or curvature change (P = 0.42).

Conclusions

Within the limitations of this in vitro study, all the tested rotary systems demonstrated clinically acceptable performance in shaping curved root canals, despite minor differences in canal transportation, centering ability, and canal straightening.