Research Article

Comparison of Apical Transportation and Canal Straightening Between Protaper Next, Hyflex, Reciproc and Reciproc Blue Instruments

Volume: 9 Number: 2 August 24, 2022
TR EN

Comparison of Apical Transportation and Canal Straightening Between Protaper Next, Hyflex, Reciproc and Reciproc Blue Instruments

Abstract

Background: The effective bonding of fiber posts which are recommended in the restoration of endodontically treated teeth with excessive coronal damage is of critical importance for the long-term success. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of various irrigation activation protocols on the push-out bond strength of fiber posts in different parts of the post space.
Methods: Forty-eight endodontically treated mandibular first premolar teeth were divided into 4 groups according to irrigation protocol (n=12): passive irrigation(PI); manual-dynamic irrigation(MDI); sonic irrigation(SI), ultrasonic irrigation(UI). Fiber posts were bonded with a self-adhesive resin cement. Three transvers sections, were obtained from the coronal, middle, and apical regions of the root, in 2 mm thich each. Push-out bond strength in each section was calculated in MPa using a universal-testing machine. Each sample was examined under a stereomicroscope and failure types were classified as follows: adhesive failure between cement and dentin-Adhesive(C/D); adhesive failure between cement and fiber post-Adhesive(C/F); the combination of both adhesive failure types-mix.
Results: The lowest bond strength was obtained for PI group (p<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between the other groups (p>0.05). Coronal region showed higher bond strength than the apical region regardless of test group (p<0.05). While mixed failure was observed dominantly in the MDI, SI and UI groups, PI was the group that showed the adhesive(C/D) failure type in most.
Conclusion: After preparing the post space, the use of any of the manual-dynamic, sonic or ultrasonic irrigation activation methods increases the bond strength of fiber posts to root canal dentin compared to passive irrigation. Regardless of the irrigation method applied, the bond strength of the fiber post to the root canal was higher in the coronal region compared to the apical region.

Keywords

References

  1. 1. Kell, T., Azarpazhooh, A., Peters, O. A., El-Mowafy, O., Tompson, B., Basrani, B. Torsional profiles of new and used 20/. 06 GT series X and GT rotary endodontic instruments. J Endod 2009; 35: 1278-81.
  2. 2. Alrahabi, M., Comparative study of root-canal shaping with stainless steel and rotary NiTi files performed by preclinical dental students. Technol Health Care 2015; 23: 257-65.
  3. 3. Tan BT, Messer HH. The quality of apical canal preparation using hand and rotary instruments with specific criteria for enlargement based on initial apical file size. J Endod 2002; 28: 658–64.
  4. 4. Shuping GB, Ørstavik D, Sigurdsson A, Trope M. Reduction of intracanal bacteria using nickel–titanium rotary instrumentation and various medications. J Endod 2000; 26: 751–5.
  5. 5. Wu MK, Fan B, Wesselink PR. Leakage along apical root fillings in curved root canals: part I—effects of apical transportation on seal of root fillings. J Endod 2000; 26: 210–6
  6. 6. Paleker, F. and P.J. van der Vyver. Comparison of canal transportation and centering ability of K-files, ProGlider File, and G-Files: a micro-computed tomography study of curved root canals. J Endod 2016; 42: 1105-9.
  7. 7. Alapati, S.B., Brantley, W. A., Iijima, M., et al. Metallurgical characterization of a new nickel-titanium wire for rotary endodontic instruments. J Endod 2009; 35: 1589-93.
  8. 8. Zhou, H., Peng, B., Zheng, Y. F. An overview of the mechanical properties of nickel–titanium endodontic instruments. Endod Topics 2013; 29: 42-54.

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Dentistry

Journal Section

Research Article

Publication Date

August 24, 2022

Submission Date

February 27, 2021

Acceptance Date

October 14, 2021

Published in Issue

Year 2022 Volume: 9 Number: 2

APA
Türkyılmaz, A., Erdoğan, D., Akbal Dinçer, G., & Erdemir, A. (2022). Comparison of Apical Transportation and Canal Straightening Between Protaper Next, Hyflex, Reciproc and Reciproc Blue Instruments. Selcuk Dental Journal, 9(2), 402-408. https://doi.org/10.15311/selcukdentj.887570
AMA
1.Türkyılmaz A, Erdoğan D, Akbal Dinçer G, Erdemir A. Comparison of Apical Transportation and Canal Straightening Between Protaper Next, Hyflex, Reciproc and Reciproc Blue Instruments. Selcuk Dent J. 2022;9(2):402-408. doi:10.15311/selcukdentj.887570
Chicago
Türkyılmaz, Ali, Deniz Erdoğan, Gözde Akbal Dinçer, and Ali Erdemir. 2022. “Comparison of Apical Transportation and Canal Straightening Between Protaper Next, Hyflex, Reciproc and Reciproc Blue Instruments”. Selcuk Dental Journal 9 (2): 402-8. https://doi.org/10.15311/selcukdentj.887570.
EndNote
Türkyılmaz A, Erdoğan D, Akbal Dinçer G, Erdemir A (August 1, 2022) Comparison of Apical Transportation and Canal Straightening Between Protaper Next, Hyflex, Reciproc and Reciproc Blue Instruments. Selcuk Dental Journal 9 2 402–408.
IEEE
[1]A. Türkyılmaz, D. Erdoğan, G. Akbal Dinçer, and A. Erdemir, “Comparison of Apical Transportation and Canal Straightening Between Protaper Next, Hyflex, Reciproc and Reciproc Blue Instruments”, Selcuk Dent J, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 402–408, Aug. 2022, doi: 10.15311/selcukdentj.887570.
ISNAD
Türkyılmaz, Ali - Erdoğan, Deniz - Akbal Dinçer, Gözde - Erdemir, Ali. “Comparison of Apical Transportation and Canal Straightening Between Protaper Next, Hyflex, Reciproc and Reciproc Blue Instruments”. Selcuk Dental Journal 9/2 (August 1, 2022): 402-408. https://doi.org/10.15311/selcukdentj.887570.
JAMA
1.Türkyılmaz A, Erdoğan D, Akbal Dinçer G, Erdemir A. Comparison of Apical Transportation and Canal Straightening Between Protaper Next, Hyflex, Reciproc and Reciproc Blue Instruments. Selcuk Dent J. 2022;9:402–408.
MLA
Türkyılmaz, Ali, et al. “Comparison of Apical Transportation and Canal Straightening Between Protaper Next, Hyflex, Reciproc and Reciproc Blue Instruments”. Selcuk Dental Journal, vol. 9, no. 2, Aug. 2022, pp. 402-8, doi:10.15311/selcukdentj.887570.
Vancouver
1.Ali Türkyılmaz, Deniz Erdoğan, Gözde Akbal Dinçer, Ali Erdemir. Comparison of Apical Transportation and Canal Straightening Between Protaper Next, Hyflex, Reciproc and Reciproc Blue Instruments. Selcuk Dent J. 2022 Aug. 1;9(2):402-8. doi:10.15311/selcukdentj.887570