Department of Endodontology, Grande Rio University, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
J Endod. 2012 Jun;38(6):846-9. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2012.02.027. Epub 2012 Apr 17.
This study aimed to compare the filling ability of carrier-based thermoplasticized gutta-percha in flat-oval canals prepared using either rotary ProTaper files (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland) or the Self-Adjusting File system (SAF) (ReDent-Nova, Ra'anana, Israel).
Thirteen pairs of mandibular incisors were selected from a random collection. The teeth in each pair had single root canals with a flat-oval cross-section and similar sizes and dimensions. Teeth from each pair were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 experimental groups. One group was instrumented using the ProTaper NiTi system, whereas the SAF system was used in the other. Root filling was performed with Thermafil obturators (Dentsply Tulsa Dental Products, Tulsa, OK), and teeth were sectioned at 6, 5, 4, and 3 mm from the apex; the cut surface was subjected to morphometric measurement to establish the percent gutta-percha-filled area (PGFA) for each section. The Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test was used to assess the effect of the 2 preparation methods on the PGFA.
The median PGFA in the ProTaper group was 77.5%, whereas the median PGFA was 90.5% in the SAF group (P < .05). In the SAF-instrumented group, 17.8% of the specimens had a PGFA ≥95% compared with only 5.8% of the ProTaper-instrumented specimens (P < .05).
Instrumentation of the flat-oval canals with the SAF system led to a significantly higher PGFA compared with ProTaper instrumentation with syringe and needle irrigation.
本研究旨在比较使用 ProTaper 镍钛锉（登士柏 Maillefer，Ballaigues，瑞士）或自调式锉（ SAF）（ReDent-Nova，Ra'anana，以色列）预备扁平椭圆形根管时，牙胶载体热塑牙胶的充填能力。
从随机收集的 13 对下颌切牙中选择 13 对。每对牙齿均有一个具有扁平椭圆形横截面且尺寸和尺寸相似的单根根管。每对牙齿随机分为 2 个实验组中的 1 个。一组使用 ProTaper NiTi 系统进行器械预备，而另一组则使用 SAF 系统。使用 Thermafil 充填器（登士柏 Tulsa 牙科产品，塔尔萨，俄克拉荷马州）进行根管充填，并且从根尖起在 6、5、4 和 3mm 处将牙齿切成 4 个部分；对切割面进行形态计量测量，以确定每个部分的牙胶填充百分比（PGFA）。使用 Wilcoxon 配对符号秩检验评估 2 种预备方法对 PGFA 的影响。
ProTaper 组的中位数 PGFA 为 77.5%，而 SAF 组的中位数 PGFA 为 90.5%（P <.05）。在 SAF 预备组中，有 17.8%的标本 PGFA ≥95%，而 ProTaper 预备组中只有 5.8%的标本 PGFA ≥95%（P <.05）。
与使用注射器和针头冲洗的 ProTaper 器械预备相比，使用 SAF 系统预备扁平椭圆形根管可显著提高 PGFA。
