Comparative Evaluation Of The Obturating Quality Of Three Different Endodontic Rotary File Systems Using Cbct – An In-Vitro Study
Keywords:
N\AAbstract
Introduction: Efficient cleaning or shaping of root canal system are vital for successful endodontic treatment, ensuring optimal obturation and minimizing microleakage. Aims & Objectives: This in vitro research aims to compare quality of obturation by utilizing 3 rotary file systems—Coltene Gen Z, ProTaper Next, Neo Endo S—with CBCT (cone-beam computed tomography) analysis. Materials & Methodology: Forty-eight extracted single-rooted mandibular premolars have been separated into 3 groups (n=16) and instrumented using the respective file systems with an XPEDENT endomotor. Irrigation has been conducted by utilizing 5.25 percent sodium hypochlorite as well as 17 percent EDTA. Canals have been obturated with AH Plus sealer or gutta-percha using lentulospirals and hand pluggers. Result: Obturation quality was assessed using RVG and CBCT, and data were analyzed using SPSS v17.0. Results showed ProTaper Next had highest percentage of acceptable obturation (87.5 percent) or density (93.75%), followed by Coltene Gen Z (62.5%) and Neo Endo S (50%). Conclusion: ProTaper Next demonstrated superior shaping and obturation efficacy compared to Coltene Gen Z, Neo Endo S, indicating its clinical advantage in endodontic procedures.
Downloads
References
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(4):239–48.
Polineni, Swapnika; Damaraju, Bhargavi1; Bolla, Nagesh2; Sunil, Ch2; Krishna, N. Vamsee3; Sreeha, K.4. Comparative evaluation of apical extrusion of intracanal bacteria using ProTaper Next, Mtwo, and ProTaper rotary systems: An in vitro study. Journal of Conservative Dentistry 23(3):p 314-318, May–Jun 2020.
González-Chapela, Juan; Castelo-Baz, Pablo; Varela-Patiño, Purificación; Martín-Biedma, Benjamín; Ruíz-Piñón, Manuel. Alternating versus continuous rotation: Root canal transportation and centering ratio with the ProTaper Next. Journal of Conservative Dentistry 20(4):p 255-259, Jul–Aug 2017.
Gandhi, Palak Jitesh; Jobanputra, Leena H.; Prajapati, Mital Hiren; Aroori, Harika. Exploration of uninstrumented areas and volumetric precision of ProTaper Ultimate versus ProTaper Next file systems: A micro-computed tomography study. Journal of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics 28(6):p 515-521, June 2025.
Vyavahare, Nishant K.; Raghavendra, Srinidhi Surya; Desai, Niranjan N.. Comparative evaluation of apically extruded debris with V-Taper, ProTaper Next, and the Self-adjusting File systems. Journal of Conservative Dentistry 19(3):p 235-238, May–Jun 2016.
Sahni, Garima; Garg, Nisha; Chhabra, Ajay1,; Negi, Shabnam; Gupta, Sandeep; Chhabra, Vandana2. Assessment of various endodontic instrumentation systems on the amount of apically extruded bacteria - An in vitro study. Journal of Conservative Dentistry 23(3):p 270-274, May–Jun 2020.
Siqueira JF Jr. Aetiology of root canal treatment failure: why well-treated teeth can fail. Int Endod J. 2001;34(1):1–10.
Schäfer E, Schulz-Bongert U, Tulus G. Comparison of hand stainless steel and nickel–titanium rotary instrumentation using computed tomography. J Endod. 2004;30(6):432–5.
Coll JA, Sadrian R. Predicting pulpal therapy success and its relationship to exfoliation and succedaneous dentition. Pediatr Dent. 1996;18(1):57–63.
Gambarini G, Plotino G, Grande NM, et al. The evaluation of root canal shaping using micro-computed tomography. Int Endod J. 2012;45(6):532–8.
Goldberg F, Massone EJ. Comparison of three techniques for cleaning and shaping root canals. J Endod. 2002;28(3):193–5.
Wu MK, Wesselink PR. A primary observation on the preparation and obturation of oval canals. Int Endod J. 2001;34(2):137–41.
Saleh IM, Ruyter IE, Haapasalo M, Ørstavik D. Bacterial adhesion and biofilm formation on root canal filling materials. J Endod. 2004;30(5):351–5.
Moazami F, Shahsiah S, Moazami F. An in vitro evaluation of root canal preparation using rotary and reciprocating NiTi instruments. J Dent (Tehran). 2013;10(2):112–8.
Kandaswamy D, Venkateshbabu N. Root canal irrigants. J Conserv Dent. 2010;13(4):256–64.
Ruddle CJ. Cleaning and shaping the root canal system. Pathways of the Pulp. 9th ed. St. Louis: Mosby Elsevier; 2006. p. 231–91.
Topçuoğlu HS, Düzgün S, Topçuoğlu G. Laboratory comparison of the shaping abilities of two nickel–titanium rotary systems in simulated curved canals. J Dent Sci. 2021;16(1):281–7.
Weiger R, de Lucena J, de Carvalho FK, Löst C. Cleaning effectiveness of hand and rotary instruments in root canals. J Endod. 2002;28(8):556–8.
Tanalp J, Güngör T. Apical extrusion of debris: a literature review of an inherent occurrence during root canal treatment. Int Endod J. 2014;47(3):211–21.
Baumgartner JC, Mader CL. A scanning electron microscopic evaluation of four root canal irrigation regimens. J Endod. 1987;13(4):147–57.
Torabinejad M, Handysides R, Khademi AA, Bakland LK. Clinical implications of the smear layer in endodontics. J Endod. 2002;28(6):414–20.
Basrani B, Haapasalo M. Update on endodontic irrigating solutions. Endod Topics. 2012;27(1):74–102.
Mancini M, Cerroni L, Iorio L, Armellin E. CBCT vs digital periapical radiography in the diagnosis of vertical root fracture: in vitro study. J Clin Exp Dent. 2015;7(4):e579–83.
Schneider SW. A comparison of canal preparations in straight and curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1971;32(2):271–5.
Cohen S, Hargreaves KM. Pathways of the Pulp. 9th ed. Mosby Elsevier; 2006.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
Terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
