Radiological evaluation of the morphological changes of root canals shaped with protaper™ for hand use and the protaper™ and race™ rotary instruments

Australian Endodontic Journal

Volumn 34, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 115-119

  Aguiar, Carlos M ^a   Câmara, Andréa C ^a  

^a FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF PERNAMBUCO   (Brazil)

Author keywords

Dental instruments; Dental pulp cavity; Instrumentation; Root canal; Root canal preparation

Indexed keywords

DENTAL ALLOY; NICKEL; TITANIUM; TITANIUM NICKELIDE;

ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DENTAL EQUIPMENT; DENTAL SURGERY; ENDODONTICS; EVALUATION; HUMAN; IMAGE SUBTRACTION; INSTRUMENTATION; METHODOLOGY; MOLAR TOOTH; RADIOGRAPHY; TOOTH PULP; TOOTH RADIOGRAPHY; TOOTH ROOT;

DENTAL ALLOYS; DENTAL INSTRUMENTS; DENTAL PULP CAVITY; HUMANS; MOLAR; NICKEL; RADIOGRAPHY, DENTAL; ROOT CANAL PREPARATION; SMEAR LAYER; SUBTRACTION TECHNIQUE; TITANIUM; TOOTH APEX;

EID: 62449137025     PISSN: 13291947     EISSN: 17474477     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1747-4477.2007.00109.x     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Schilder H. Cleaning and shaping the root canal. Dent Clin North Am 1974; 18: 269-96.
2. European Society of Endodontology. Undergraduate curriculum guidelines for endodontology. Int Endod J 2001; 34: 574-80.
3. Schäfer E, Tepel J, Hoppe W. Properties of endodontic hand instruments used in rotary motion. Part 2. instrumentation of curved canals. J Endod 1995; 21: 493-7.
4. Ferraz CC, Gomes NV, Gomes BP, Zaia AA, Teixeira FB, Souza-Filho FJ. Apical extrusion of debris and irrigants using two hand and three engine-driven instrumentation techniques. Int Endod J 2001; 34: 354-8.
5. Schäfer E, Vlassis M. Comparative investigation of two rotary nickel-titanium instruments: ProTaper versus RaCe. Part 1. shaping ability in simulated curved canals. Int Endod J 2004; 37: 229-38.
6. Günday M, Sazak H, Garip Y. A comparative study of three different root canal curvature measurement techniques and measuring the canal access angle in curved canals. J Endod 2005; 31: 796-8.
7. Sydney GB, Batista A, de Melo LL. The radiographic platform: a new method to evaluate root canal preparation in vitro. J Endod 1991; 17: 570-2.
8. Iqbal MK, Firic S, Tulcan J, Karabucak B, Kim S. Comparison of apical transportation between ProFile™ and ProTaper™ NiTi rotary instruments. Int Endod J 2004; 37: 359-64.
9. Walia H, Brantley WA, Gerstein NH. An initial investigation of the bending and torsional properties of Nitinol root canal files. J Endod 1988; 14: 346-57.
10. Ingle JI. A standardized endodontic technique utilizing newly designed instruments and filling materials. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1961; 14: 83-91.
11. Haikel Y, Serfaty R, Batemen G, Senger B, Alleman C. Dynamic and cyclic fatigue of engine rotary nickeltitanium endodontic instruments. J Endod 1999; 25: 434-40.
12. Bergmans L, Van Cleynenbreugel J, Beullens M, Wevers M, Van Meerbeek B, Lambrechts P. Progressive versus constant tapered shaft design using NiTi rotary instruments. Int Endod J 2003; 36: 288-95.
13. Mullaney TP. Instrumentation of finely curved canals. Dent Clin North Am 1979; 23: 575-92.
14. Schäfer E, Vlassis M. Comparative investigation of two rotary nickel-titanium instruments: ProTaper versus RaCe. Part 2. cleaning effectiveness and shaping ability in severely curved root canals of extracted teeth. Int Endod J 2004; 37: 239-48.
15. Calberson LG, Deroose CAJG, Hommez GMG, de Moor RJG. Shaping ability of ProTaper nickel-titanium files in simulated resin root canals. Int Endod J 2004; 37: 613-23.
16. Ankrum MT, Hartwell GR, Truitt JE. K3 Endo, ProTaper, and ProFile Systems: breakage and distortion in severely curved root of molars. J Endod 2004; 30: 234-7.
17. Veltri M, Mollo A, Pini PP, Ghelli LF, Balleri P. In vitro comparison of shaping abilities of ProTaper and GT rotary files. J Endod 2004; 30: 163-6.
18. Yun H, Kim SK. A comparison of the shaping abilities of 4 nickel-titanium rotary instruments in simulated root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2003; 95: 228-33.