JIOH on LinkedIn JIOH on Facebook
  • Users Online: 120
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
ORIGINAL RESEARCH
Year : 2016  |  Volume : 8  |  Issue : 8  |  Page : 850-855

Deviation in Simulated Curved Canals Prepared with Reciproc and ProTaper Systems


1 PhD Student, Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Estácio de Sá University, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil
2 Associate Professor, Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Estácio de Sá University, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil
3 Professor, Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Estácio de Sá University, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil

Correspondence Address:
Luciana Armada
Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Estácio de Sá University - Av. Alfredo Baltazar de Oliveira, 580 - Recreio dos Bandeirantes

Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.2047/jioh-08-08-03

Rights and Permissions

Background: The incidence of deviation in simulated curved canals was compared after preparation with nickel-titanium instruments driven by continuous rotation and reciprocal movement motors. Materials and Methods: A total of 40 epoxy resin blocks were filled with ink, and pre-instrumentation images were obtained by a stereomicroscope. Instrumentation was performed using either Reciproc (R25) or ProTaper (up to F3). Post-instrumentation images were obtained under the same conditions as those of the previous images, and then, images were superimposed. Differences along and on the mesial and distal surfaces of the canal were measured in 8 points. Results: Intragroup analysis demonstrated that the two systems promote deviations along the 8 points of measurement in the canal. Within the ProTaper group, significant differences (P < 0.01) with greater deviations were at the following points: 4 mm >7 mm >3 mm >6 mm. In Reciproc group, significant differences (P < 0.05) were found at points: 3 mm >4 mm >2 mm >1 mm. ProTaper group presented smaller deviation at points: 0, 2, 3, 4, and 6 mm compared with Reciproc group. Conclusion: The results suggest that continuous mechanized instrumentation with previous and progressive cervical preparation in the apical direction, with specific files, tends to perform a more adequate preparation with less risk of displacing the original canal when compared with a single instrument with reciprocal movement.


[PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed220    
    Printed3    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded21    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal