Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2006.31.1.011

Comparison of shaping ability between various hybrid instrumentation methods with ProTaper  

Hong, Eun-Sook (Department of Conservative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Pusan National University)
Park, Jeong-Kil (Department of Conservative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Pusan National University)
Hur, Bock (Department of Conservative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Pusan National University)
Kim, Hyeon-Cheol (Department of Conservative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Pusan National University)
Publication Information
Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics / v.31, no.1, 2006 , pp. 11-19 More about this Journal
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to compare and evaluate the shaping abilities of various hybrid instrumentation method using constant tapered file systems with $ProTaper\^{(R)}$ S1 and the difference between experts and inexperienced clinicians in use of NiTi file. Three hybrid methods used in this study were composed of $ProTaper\^{(R)}\;S1\;and\;K-Flexofile\^{(R)}\;(group S),\;ProTaper\^{(R)}\;S1\;and\;HeroShaper\^{(R)}\;(group\;H),\;and\;ProTaper\^{(R)}\;S1\;and\;ProFile\^{(R)}\;(group\;P)$respectively. The $ProTaper\^{(R)}$-alone method (group C) was introduced as a control group. After canal preparation, the lapse of time was recorded. The images of pre- and post-operative canal were scanned and superimposed. Amounts of instrumented canal widths and centering ratio were measured at apical 1, 2 and 3 mm levels and statistical analysis was performed In this study. both of the group C and S took more time to prepare canals than other groups, Inexperienced operators required more time for the entire preparation with the groups C and H than the experienced (p<0.05). And the centering ratio of group P were preferable to $ProTaper\^{(R)}$-alone method or the hybrid technique using stainless steel files. As such, within experienced operators, group H also showed better results in addition to the group P. Under these condition, the hybrid methods of each the $ProFile^{(R)}$ system and $HeroShaper^{(R)}$ with ProTaper are recommendable comparative to $ProTaper\^{(R)}$-alone method. According to the results, the hybrid instrumentation method is a more appropriate method of canal preparation than single file system for narrow or curved canals.
Keywords
Hybrid method; Inexperienced; Experienced; ProTaper; ProFile; Heroshaper;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 1  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Garip Y, Gunday M. The use of computed tomography when comparing nickel-titanium and stainless steel files during preparation of simulated curved canals. Int Endod J 34(6):452-457, 2001   DOI   ScienceOn
2 Yun HH, 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 95(2):228-233, 2003   DOI   ScienceOn
3 Schafer 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 37(4):229-238, 2004   DOI   ScienceOn
4 Szep S, Gerhardt T, Leitzbach C, Luder W, Heidemann D. Preparation of severely curved simulated root canals using engine-driven rotary and conventional hand instruments. Clin Oral Investig 5(1):17-25, 2001   DOI
5 Hata G, Uemma M, Kato AS, Imura N, Novo NF, Toda T. A comparison of shaping ability using ProFile, GT file, and Flex-R endodontic instruments in simulated carials. J Endod 28(4):316-321, 2002   DOI   ScienceOn
6 Kim HC, Park JK, Hur B. Relative efficacy of three Ni-Ti file systems used by undergraduates. J Kor Acad Cons Dent 30(1):38-48, 2005   DOI
7 Park WK, Lee HJ, Hur B. Shaping ability of nickel-titanium rotary files. J Kor Acad Cons Dent 29(1):44-50, 2004   DOI
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 37(6):359-364, 2004   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Glosson CR, Haller RH, Dove SB, Delrio CE. A comparison of root canal preparation using NiTi hand, NiTi engine driven and K-Flex endodontic instruments. J Endod 21:146-151, 1995   DOI   ScienceOn
10 Gonza 'lez-Rodr' guez MP, Ferrer-Luque CM. A comparison of Profile, Hero 642, and K3 instrumentation systems in teeth using digital imaging analysis. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 97(1):112-115, 2004   DOI   ScienceOn
11 Berutti E, Chiandussi G, Gaviglio I, Ibba A. Comparative analysis of torsional and bending stresses in two mathematical models of nickel-titanium rotary instruments: ProTaper versus ProFile. J Endod 29(1):15-19, 2003   DOI   ScienceOn
12 Walsch H. The hybrid concept of nickel?titanium rotary instrumentation. Dent Clin North Am 48:183-202, 2004   DOI   ScienceOn
13 Calhoun G, Montgomery S. The effects of four instrumentation techniques on root canal shape. J Endod 14(6):273-277, 1988   DOI   ScienceOn
14 Griffiths IT, Bryant ST, Dummer PM. Canal shapes produced sequentially during instrumentation with Quantec LX rotary nickel-titanium instruments: a study in simulated canals. Int Endod J 33:346-354, 2000   DOI   ScienceOn
15 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 36(4):288-295, 2003   DOI   ScienceOn
16 Ankrum MT, Hartwell GR, Truitt JE. K3 Endo, ProTaper, and ProFile systems: breakage and distortion in severely curved roots of molars. J Endod 30(4):234-237, 2004   DOI   ScienceOn
17 Calberson FL, Deroose CA, Hommez GM, De Moor RJ. Shaping ability of ProTaper nickel-titanium files in simulated resin root canals. Int Endod J 37(9):613-623, 2004   DOI   ScienceOn
18 Schafer E, Schulz-Bongert U, Tulus G. Comparison of hand stainless steel and nickel titanium rotary instrumentation: clinical study. J Endod 30(6):432-435, 2004   DOI   ScienceOn
19 Park H. A comparison of Greater Taper files, Profiles and stainless steel files to shape curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 91(6):715-718, 2001   DOI   ScienceOn
20 Chen JL, Messer HH. A comparison of stainless steel hand and rotary nickel-titanium instrumentation using a silicone impression technique. Aust Dent J 47(1):12-20, 2002   DOI   ScienceOn
21 Clauder T, Baumann MA, ProTaper NT system. Dent Clin North Am 48(1):87-111, 2004   DOI   ScienceOn
22 Peters OA. Current Challenges and Concepts in the Preparation of Root Canal Systems: A Review. J Endod 30(8):559-567, 2004   DOI   ScienceOn
23 Walia H, Brantley WA, Gerstein H. An initial investigation of the bending and torsional properties of Nitinol root canal files. J Endod 14(7):346-351, 1988   DOI   ScienceOn
24 Garala M, Kuttler S, Hardigan P, Steiner-Carmi R, Dorn S. A Comparison of the minimum canal wall thickness remaining following preparation using two nickel-titanium rotary systems. Int Endod J 36:636-642, 2003   DOI   ScienceOn
25 Thompson SA, Dummer PMH. Shaping ability of Hero642 rotary nickel- titanium instruments in simulated root canals: Part 1. Int Endod J 33:248-254, 2000   DOI   ScienceOn
26 Powell SE, Simon JHS, Maze B. A comparison of the effect of modified and nonmodified instrument tips on apical canal configuration. J Endod 12:293-300, 1986   DOI   ScienceOn
27 Park SH, Cho KM, Kim JW. The Efficiency of the Ni-Ti Rotary files in Curved Simulated Canals Shaped by Novice Operators. J Kor Acad Cons Dent 28(2):146-155, 2003   과학기술학회마을   DOI
28 Schafer E. Shaping ability of Hero 642 rotary nickel-titanium instruments and stainless steel hand K-Flexofiles in simulated curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 92(2):215-220, 2001   DOI   ScienceOn
29 Peters OA, Peters CI, Barbakow F. ProTaper rotary root canal preparation: effects of canal anatomy on final shape analysed by micro CT. Int Endod J 36(1):86-92, 2003   DOI   ScienceOn
30 Kosa DA, Marshall G, Baumgartner JC. An analysis of canal centering using mechanical instrumentation techniques. J Endod 25(6):441-445, 1999   DOI   ScienceOn