Uzunoglu Emel, Turker Sevinc Aktemur, Görduysus Melahat
Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Hacettepe University, Ankara, TR.
Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Bülent Ecevit University, Zonguldak, TR.
Braz Dent J. 2015 Jul-Aug;26(4):347-50. doi: 10.1590/0103-6440201300166.
The aim of this study was to compare the apically extruded debris associated with ProTaper Next and OneShape Apical files using two different irrigation needles, open-ended and closed-ended (Max-I-Probe). Forty-eight mandibular premolars were assigned to four groups (n=12) as follows: Group PTN-SN: Root canal was prepared with ProTaper Next (PTN) and irrigated with open-ended standard needle; Group PTN-MP: Root canal was prepared with PTN and irrigated with Max-I-Probe; Group OSA-SN: Root canal was prepared with OneShape Apical (OSA) and irrigated with open-ended needle; Group OSA-MP: Root canal was prepared with OSA and irrigated with Max-I-Probe. Debris extruded during instrumentation was collected into pre-weighed Eppendorf tubes. After storage in an incubator at 70 °C for 5 days, the Eppendorf tubes were weighed to obtain the final weight with extruded debris. The difference between pre-and post-debris weights was calculated and statistical analysis was performed using Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests (p<0.05). No statistically significant difference was observed between files and needles regarding amount of apically extruded debris (p>0.05). OneShape Apical and ProTaper Next resulted in extrusion of debris beyond the apical foramen, regardless of needle tip.
