Indian Journal of Dental ResearchIndian Journal of Dental ResearchIndian Journal of Dental Research
HOME | ABOUT US | EDITORIAL BOARD | AHEAD OF PRINT | CURRENT ISSUE | ARCHIVES | INSTRUCTIONS | SUBSCRIBE | ADVERTISE | CONTACT
Indian Journal of Dental Research   Login   |  Users online: 169

Home Bookmark this page Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font size Increase font size         

 


 
ORIGINAL RESEARCH Table of Contents   
Year : 2009  |  Volume : 20  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 400-403
Canal-centring ability of three rotary file systems in simulated curved canals: A comparative study


1 Department of Endodontics, Dental School, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
2 Medical School, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Correspondence Address:
Zohreh Khalilak
Department of Endodontics, Dental School, Islamic Azad University, Tehran
Iran
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0970-9290.59430

Rights and Permissions

Objective: To compare the canal-centring ability of M two , ProFile and RaCe rotary files, in simulated curved canals. Materials and Methods: About 30 simulated canals were prepared by M two , ProFile and RaCe rotary files. Pre and post-operative pictures were super-imposed and transportations recorded. Measurements were carried out at five different points: Canal orifice (O); half-way to the orifice in the straight section (HO); the beginning of the curve (BC); the apex of the curve (AC); the end point (EP). Intra- and inter-group comparisons were carried out by Wilcoxon`s signed ranks test and Kruskal-Wallis test respectively, using SPSS 14.0 software. Results: ProFile did not change canal centricity in any point. RaCe kept centricity at HO, BC, AC and EP. M two changed canal centricity in points BC, AC and EP. M two group kept the centricity significantly less than the other two groups at BC (P = 0.004), AC (P = 0.015) and EP (P = 0.01). There was no significant difference between these three rotary files at HO. However, the difference between RaCe, M two and ProFile was significant at O (P = 0.015). Conclusion: ProFile and RaCe rotary files remained better centred than M two rotary files


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article

 
 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
  Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
  Reader Comments
  Email Alert *
  Add to My List *
 
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed5103    
    Printed162    
    Emailed6    
    PDF Downloaded476    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 1    

Recommend this journal