Journal of Operative Dentistry & Endodontics

Register      Login

VOLUME 7 , ISSUE 1 ( January-June, 2022 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Cone-beam Computed Tomographic Analysis of Apical Transportation and Centering Ratio of TruNatomy and V-taper 2H NiTi Rotary Systems in Curved Canals: An In Vitro Study

Mohammed Naumaan Mujawar, Manje Gowda, Jayalakshmi Kulambi Basavangowda, Prasanna Latha Nadig, Shibani Shetty

Keywords : Canal transportation, Centering ability, TruNatomy, V-Taper 2H

Citation Information : Mujawar MN, Gowda M, Basavangowda JK, Nadig PL, Shetty S. Cone-beam Computed Tomographic Analysis of Apical Transportation and Centering Ratio of TruNatomy and V-taper 2H NiTi Rotary Systems in Curved Canals: An In Vitro Study. J Oper Dent Endod 2022; 7 (1):1-5.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10047-0120

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 21-08-2023

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2022; The Author(s).


Abstract

Aim: This study aimed to compare the canal transportation and centering ratio using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) in the preparation of curved root canals after instrumentation with TruNatomy (TN) and V-Taper 2H (VT) files. Materials and methods: Twenty mandibular molar mesiobuccal canals with an angle of curvature ranging from 20 to 40° were split into two groups of 10 samples each based on the file system used to prepare the canals: TN (group I) and VT (group II). The teeth were instrumented according to the manufacturer's instructions up to 26 no. in TN and 25 no. in VT apical preparation. Before and after preparation, canals were examined using CBCT to assess the transportation and centering ratio at 3, 5, and 7 mm from the apex. The degree of transportation and the capacity for centering were evaluated. The two groups were statistically compared with the Mann–Whitney and Friedman's tests. Results: Both instruments did not deviate from the original canal curvature having no significant difference in the apical transportation and remained centered in the canal. Conclusion: TruNatomy and VT instruments produced less transportation and remained centered around the original canal to a great degree due to their cross-section, heat treatment, and reduced taper.


HTML PDF Share
  1. Schilder H. Cleaning and shaping the root canal. Dent Clin North Am 1974;18(2):269–296. PMID: 4522570.
  2. Weine FS, Kelly RF, Lio PJ. The effect of preparation procedures on original canal shape and on apical foramen shape. J Endod 1975;1(8):255–262. DOI: 10.1016/S0099-2399(75)80037-9.
  3. Nagaraja S, Sreenivasa Murthy BV. CT evaluation of canal preparation using rotary and hand NI-TI instruments: An in vitro study. J Conserv Dent 2010;13(1):16–22. DOI: 10.4103/0972-0707.62636.
  4. Peters OA. Current challenges and concepts in the preparation of root canal systems: A review. J Endod 2004;30(8):559–567. DOI: 10.1097/01.don.0000129039.59003.9d.
  5. Dentsply Sirona. TruNatomy brochure. Available at: https://www.dentsplysirona.com/en/explore/endodontics/trunatomy.html. Accessed on: 15 March 2022.
  6. Elnaghy AM, Elsaka SE, Mandorah AO. In vitro comparison of cyclic fatigue resistance of TruNatomy in single and double curvature canals compared with different nickel-titanium rotary instruments. BMC Oral Health 2020;20(1):38. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-020-1027-7.
  7. V Taper 2H Rotary Files. Available from: http://www.sswhitedental.com/content/v-taper%E2%84%A22h-rotary-files. Accessed on: 15 March 2022.
  8. Kaval ME, Capar ID, Ertas H. Evaluation of the cyclic fatigue and torsional resistance of novel nickel-titanium rotary files with various alloy properties. J Endod 2016;42(12):1840–1843. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2016.07.015.
  9. Schneider SW. A comparison of canal preparations in straight and curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1971;32(2):271–275. DOI: 10.1016/0030-4220(71)90230-1.
  10. Gambill JM, Alder M, del Rio CE. Comparison of nickel-titanium and stainless steel hand-file instrumentation using computed tomography. J Endod 1996;22(7):369–375. DOI: 10.1016/S0099-2399(96)80221-4.
  11. Ingle JI, Bakland LK. Endodontic mishaps: Their detection, correction and prevention. Endodontics, 5th ed., Ch. 14, PMPHUSA: Elsevier BC; 2002, p. 7.
  12. McRay B, Cox TC, Cohenca N, et al. A micro-computed tomography-based comparison of the canal transportation and centering ability of ProTaper Universal rotary and WaveOne reciprocating files. Quintessence Int 2014;45(2):101–108. DOI: 10.3290/j.qi.a30998.
  13. Rhodes JS, Ford TR, Lynch JA, et al. Micro-computed tomography: A new tool for experimental endodontology. Int Endod J 1999;32(3): 165–170. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.1999.00204.x.
  14. Gluskin AH, Brown DC, Buchanan LS. A reconstructed computerized tomographic comparison of Ni-Ti rotary GT files versus traditional instruments in canals shaped by novice operators. Int Endod J 2001;34(6):476–484. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.2001.00422.x.
  15. Pagliosa A, Sousa-Neto MD, Versiani MA, et al. Computed tomography evaluation of rotary systems on the root canal transportation and centering ability. Braz Oral Res 2015;29:S1806-83242015000100240. DOI: 10.1590/1807-3107BOR-2015.vol29.0039.
  16. Hülsmann M, Schade M, Schäfers F. A comparative study of root canal preparation with HERO 642 and Quantec SC rotary Ni-Ti instruments. Int Endod J 2001;34(7):538–546. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.2001.00431.x.
  17. Arora A, Taneja S, Kumar M. Comparative evaluation of shaping ability of different rotary NiTi instruments in curved canals using CBCT. J Conserv Dent 2014;17(1):35–39. DOI: 10.4103/0972-0707. 124127.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.