Comparison of centering ability of three different endodontic instruments using cone-beam computed tomography: An in vitro study

Vignesh Palanisamy, Arathi Rao, Ramya Shenoy, Karuna Y. Mahabala, Suprabha B. Srikrishna

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Aim: Centering ability of an instrument is the ability of the instrument to act centrally inside the canal without deflections. This property is of significance in assessment of any endodontic file because endodontic accidents due to instrumentation, commonly apical transportation can be avoided in case of a perfectly centered instrument. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to compare three different endodontic files, K File, Hand ProTaper, and Rotary ProTaper for their centering ability using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Materials and methods: On 30 extracted mandibular premolars, 3 reference lines were created from the apex. Preoperative CBCT images were made and analyzed. D1 and D2 are the centering ratios measured buccolingually and mesiodistally, following which the samples were randomly allotted to one of the three groups (K File, Hand ProTaper, and Rotary ProTaper) for instrumentation. Postoperative images were obtained and canal dimensions were assessed. The differences were calculated and the centering ability was determined using the centering ratio formula. Comparison was done using ANOVA test. Results: The mean working length of all the samples was 20.8 mm. The average preoperative D1 and D2 values obtained were 0.0067 and 0.0117, respectively. Following instrumentation, the obtained D1 and D2 values in group I, group II, and group III were 0.0048 and 1.07, 0.783 and 1.24, and 0.785 and 0.96, respectively. Intergroup comparison showed insignificant p value (p > 0.05). Conclusion: K File, Hand ProTaper, and Rotary ProTaper were equally efficient to act centrally in straight canals. Clinical significance: Centering ability of an instrument is of significance in avoiding accidents such as canal transportation. K File, Hand ProTaper, and Rotary ProTaper were found to be equally efficient to act centrally in straight canals.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)306-309
Number of pages4
JournalWorld Journal of Dentistry
Volume10
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 01-07-2019

Fingerprint

Cone-Beam Computed Tomography
Endodontics
Hand
Accidents
Bicuspid
Analysis of Variance
In Vitro Techniques

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Dentistry(all)

Cite this

@article{fab15705906d46e7ad270b942ba1d66d,
title = "Comparison of centering ability of three different endodontic instruments using cone-beam computed tomography: An in vitro study",
abstract = "Aim: Centering ability of an instrument is the ability of the instrument to act centrally inside the canal without deflections. This property is of significance in assessment of any endodontic file because endodontic accidents due to instrumentation, commonly apical transportation can be avoided in case of a perfectly centered instrument. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to compare three different endodontic files, K File, Hand ProTaper, and Rotary ProTaper for their centering ability using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Materials and methods: On 30 extracted mandibular premolars, 3 reference lines were created from the apex. Preoperative CBCT images were made and analyzed. D1 and D2 are the centering ratios measured buccolingually and mesiodistally, following which the samples were randomly allotted to one of the three groups (K File, Hand ProTaper, and Rotary ProTaper) for instrumentation. Postoperative images were obtained and canal dimensions were assessed. The differences were calculated and the centering ability was determined using the centering ratio formula. Comparison was done using ANOVA test. Results: The mean working length of all the samples was 20.8 mm. The average preoperative D1 and D2 values obtained were 0.0067 and 0.0117, respectively. Following instrumentation, the obtained D1 and D2 values in group I, group II, and group III were 0.0048 and 1.07, 0.783 and 1.24, and 0.785 and 0.96, respectively. Intergroup comparison showed insignificant p value (p > 0.05). Conclusion: K File, Hand ProTaper, and Rotary ProTaper were equally efficient to act centrally in straight canals. Clinical significance: Centering ability of an instrument is of significance in avoiding accidents such as canal transportation. K File, Hand ProTaper, and Rotary ProTaper were found to be equally efficient to act centrally in straight canals.",
author = "Vignesh Palanisamy and Arathi Rao and Ramya Shenoy and Mahabala, {Karuna Y.} and Srikrishna, {Suprabha B.}",
year = "2019",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.5005/jp-journals-10015-1654",
language = "English",
volume = "10",
pages = "306--309",
journal = "World Journal of Dentistry",
issn = "0976-6006",
publisher = "Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd",
number = "4",

}

Comparison of centering ability of three different endodontic instruments using cone-beam computed tomography : An in vitro study. / Palanisamy, Vignesh; Rao, Arathi; Shenoy, Ramya; Mahabala, Karuna Y.; Srikrishna, Suprabha B.

In: World Journal of Dentistry, Vol. 10, No. 4, 01.07.2019, p. 306-309.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of centering ability of three different endodontic instruments using cone-beam computed tomography

T2 - An in vitro study

AU - Palanisamy, Vignesh

AU - Rao, Arathi

AU - Shenoy, Ramya

AU - Mahabala, Karuna Y.

AU - Srikrishna, Suprabha B.

PY - 2019/7/1

Y1 - 2019/7/1

N2 - Aim: Centering ability of an instrument is the ability of the instrument to act centrally inside the canal without deflections. This property is of significance in assessment of any endodontic file because endodontic accidents due to instrumentation, commonly apical transportation can be avoided in case of a perfectly centered instrument. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to compare three different endodontic files, K File, Hand ProTaper, and Rotary ProTaper for their centering ability using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Materials and methods: On 30 extracted mandibular premolars, 3 reference lines were created from the apex. Preoperative CBCT images were made and analyzed. D1 and D2 are the centering ratios measured buccolingually and mesiodistally, following which the samples were randomly allotted to one of the three groups (K File, Hand ProTaper, and Rotary ProTaper) for instrumentation. Postoperative images were obtained and canal dimensions were assessed. The differences were calculated and the centering ability was determined using the centering ratio formula. Comparison was done using ANOVA test. Results: The mean working length of all the samples was 20.8 mm. The average preoperative D1 and D2 values obtained were 0.0067 and 0.0117, respectively. Following instrumentation, the obtained D1 and D2 values in group I, group II, and group III were 0.0048 and 1.07, 0.783 and 1.24, and 0.785 and 0.96, respectively. Intergroup comparison showed insignificant p value (p > 0.05). Conclusion: K File, Hand ProTaper, and Rotary ProTaper were equally efficient to act centrally in straight canals. Clinical significance: Centering ability of an instrument is of significance in avoiding accidents such as canal transportation. K File, Hand ProTaper, and Rotary ProTaper were found to be equally efficient to act centrally in straight canals.

AB - Aim: Centering ability of an instrument is the ability of the instrument to act centrally inside the canal without deflections. This property is of significance in assessment of any endodontic file because endodontic accidents due to instrumentation, commonly apical transportation can be avoided in case of a perfectly centered instrument. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to compare three different endodontic files, K File, Hand ProTaper, and Rotary ProTaper for their centering ability using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Materials and methods: On 30 extracted mandibular premolars, 3 reference lines were created from the apex. Preoperative CBCT images were made and analyzed. D1 and D2 are the centering ratios measured buccolingually and mesiodistally, following which the samples were randomly allotted to one of the three groups (K File, Hand ProTaper, and Rotary ProTaper) for instrumentation. Postoperative images were obtained and canal dimensions were assessed. The differences were calculated and the centering ability was determined using the centering ratio formula. Comparison was done using ANOVA test. Results: The mean working length of all the samples was 20.8 mm. The average preoperative D1 and D2 values obtained were 0.0067 and 0.0117, respectively. Following instrumentation, the obtained D1 and D2 values in group I, group II, and group III were 0.0048 and 1.07, 0.783 and 1.24, and 0.785 and 0.96, respectively. Intergroup comparison showed insignificant p value (p > 0.05). Conclusion: K File, Hand ProTaper, and Rotary ProTaper were equally efficient to act centrally in straight canals. Clinical significance: Centering ability of an instrument is of significance in avoiding accidents such as canal transportation. K File, Hand ProTaper, and Rotary ProTaper were found to be equally efficient to act centrally in straight canals.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85078297774&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85078297774&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-1654

DO - 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-1654

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85078297774

VL - 10

SP - 306

EP - 309

JO - World Journal of Dentistry

JF - World Journal of Dentistry

SN - 0976-6006

IS - 4

ER -