Abstract

Evaluate the discrepancy in diameter and taper between adapted gutta-percha cones for TruNatomyTM 26.04 (TRU04), RotateTM 25.04 (ROT04) and 25.06 (ROT06) systems and their reference files. A sample of 60 gutta-percha cones and 15 rotary files was selected and divided into three groups (TRU04, ROT04, ROT06). Each group consisted of 20 cones and 5 corresponding files. They were observed under an optical microscope at x20 magnification and images of all observations were obtained. Diameters were measured with a digital ruler calibrated at 3 levels: D1, D3, D16 (mm from tip). The taper of each system of cones and files was calculated, The percentage of discrepancy between the taper of each file system and its corresponding gutta-percha cone was calculated. The percentage of discrepancy between the diameter of the tested gutta-percha cones and their corresponding files varied from -7% to 21%. The smallest dimensional discrepancy between gutta-percha cone and corresponding file was found at D16 in TRU04 group. The tapers of the gutta-percha cones vs their respective files were: 2% vs 3% (TRU04), 4% vs 5% (ROT04), and 6% vs 5% (ROT06). The highest discrepancy was observed at D16 in ROT06 group. The global taper discrepancy between gutta-percha cone and its corresponding file was negative in TRU04 and ROT04 groups. The taper and the diameter at D1, D3, and D16 differed between all of the tested gutta-percha cones and their corresponding files. TruNatomy 26.04 files and its adapted gutta-percha cones exhibited the least discrepancy. Key words:Corresponding gutta-percha, rotary file, taper, TruNatomy, Rotate, standardization.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call