A Dafalla Azza, Hassan Abubakr Neamat, E Ibrahim Yahia
Department of Conservative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Africa University of Medical Science, Khartoum, Sudan.
Department Professor of Conservative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Khartoum, Khartoum, Sudan.
Iran Endod J. 2010 Fall;5(4):167-73. Epub 2010 Nov 15.
The aim of the present study was to compare hand stainless steel K-files and Nickel-Titanium Profile 0.04 taper 29 series rotary instruments for their efficiency, procedural errors and time consumed in preparation of root canal system.
A total of 46 maxillary and mandibular first premolars extracted for orthodontic purposes were collected (two contralateral teeth from each individual). The samples were divided into two groups of 34 canals each. Teeth in the first group were prepared with stainless steel hand K-files while the second groups were prepared with profile 0.04 taper series 29 rotary files. Preparation period was recorded for both groups. Impression material was introduced into the prepared canals so that the replica of prepared canals was achieved. These were assessed under stereomicroscope to assess the efficiency in preparing canals in respect to canal smoothness, ability of impression material to flow and quality of taper.Statistical analyses were performed using t-test, Chi-square and Fishers exact tests.
RESULTS showed significantly shorter preparation time for Profile than K-file. 8.8% of the canals prepared with K-files showed canal blockage, while all canals prepared with Profile remained patent. Alterations in working length working distance appeared in 23.5% of canals prepared with K-file and 11.7% in canals prepared with Profile. Failed instruments in K-files were significantly higher, mostly deformation (P<0.001). Profiles failed instruments were in the form of fracture and no deformation was detected. Both systems showed unsatisfactory walls smoothness and flow.
Within the limitation of this study it was concluded that Profile 0.04 taper series 29 rotary systems prepare canals more rapidly, and have lower incidences of fracture and blockages, and only limited loss of working length. Canal preparation with K-file was time consuming and showed higher incidence of deformed instruments; overall, rotary instruments seem to offer greater advantages.
本研究的目的是比较手动不锈钢K锉和镍钛Profile 0.04锥度29系列旋转器械在根管系统预备中的效率、操作失误及耗时情况。
共收集46颗因正畸需要拔除的上颌和下颌第一前磨牙（每位个体双侧各两颗牙齿）。样本被分为两组，每组34个根管。第一组牙齿用不锈钢手动K锉预备，第二组用Profile 0.04锥度29系列旋转锉预备。记录两组的预备时间。将印模材料导入预备好的根管，从而获得预备根管的复制品。在体视显微镜下对其进行评估，以评价根管预备在根管光滑度、印模材料的流动性及锥度质量方面的效率。使用t检验、卡方检验和Fisher精确检验进行统计学分析。
结果显示，Profile的预备时间明显短于K锉。用K锉预备的根管中有8.8%出现根管堵塞，而用Profile预备的所有根管均保持通畅。使用K锉预备的根管中有23.5%出现工作长度工作距离改变，而使用Profile预备的根管中这一比例为11.7%。K锉组器械折断率显著更高，主要为变形（P<0.001）。Profile组器械折断表现为断裂，未检测到变形。两种系统的管壁光滑度和流动性均不尽人意。
在本研究的局限性范围内，得出结论：Profile 0.04锥度29系列旋转系统预备根管更快，折断和堵塞发生率更低，工作长度损失有限。用K锉预备根管耗时且器械变形发生率更高；总体而言，旋转器械似乎具有更大优势。
