Abstract
The aim of this study was to compare Profile .04 taper series 29 instruments and hand files for gutta-percha removal. Twenty maxillary central incisors with a single straight canal were instrumented and filled. The teeth were divided into 2 groups of 10 specimens each, according to gutta-percha removal techniques: Group 1- Profile series 29 and Group 2- hand files and solvent. The amount of time for gutta-percha removal and the number of fractured instruments were evaluated. Radiographs were taken and the teeth were grooved longitudinally and split. The area of residual debris was measured using computer software. The time for filling material removal was significantly shorter when Profile series 29 was used (P = .00). Regarding cleanliness, there were no statistical differences in the teeth halves evaluations (P > .05). Hand instruments cleaned the canals significantly better than Profiles, in the radiographic analysis considering the whole canal. Overall, the radiographic analysis showed a smaller percentage of residual debris than the teeth halves analysis. The Profile series 29 instruments proved to be faster than hand instruments in removing root filling materials; however, hand instruments yielded better root canal cleanliness. Some residual debris was not visualized by radiographs.
Published Version
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 callMore From: Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology, and Endodontology
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
