Comparative evaluation of dentinal crack formation after root canal preparation using ProTaper Next, OneShape, and Hyflex EDM

• Published in: Journal of conservative dentistry Vol. 21; no. 2; pp. 153 - 156
• Main Authors: Das, Sanjib, Pradhan, Prasanti Kumari, Lata, S, Sinha, Sachidananda Prasad
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: India Medknow Publications and Media Pvt. Ltd 01.03.2018; Medknow Publications & Media Pvt. Ltd; Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
• Subjects: Aluminum; Data processing; Defects; Dentin; Efficiency; Endodontics; Ligaments; Mandible; Manufacturing; Methods; Nickel; Original; Physiological aspects; Premolars; Root canal therapy; Root canals; Studies; Teeth; Wire; India; Dentin cracks; OneShape; Hyflex electrodischarge machining; ProTaper Next
• ISSN: 0972-0707; 0974-5203
• DOI: 10.4103/JCD.JCD_219_17

The purpose of this study was to compare the incidence of dentinal crack formation after root canal preparation using ProTaper Next, OneShape, and Hyflex electrodischarge machining (HEDM). A total of 75 extracted mandibular premolars were selected. The root canals were instrumented using ProTaper Next, OneShape, and HEDM rotary files. All roots were horizontally sectioned at 3, 6, and 9 mm from apex with slow-speed saw under water cooling. The sections were observed under a stereomicroscope at ×25 to determine the absence or presence of crack. Data were analyzed using test and one-way ANOVA. ProTaper Next and HEDM produced significantly less cracks than OneShape. Within the limitation of this study, it can be concluded that nickel-titanium instruments may cause cracks on the root surface. ProTaper Next and HEDM tend to produce less number of cracks as compared to OneShape.