A computer evaluation of the dentin remaining after cervical preparation in curved canals: gates-glidden drills vs. orifice shaper
The aim of this study was to evaluate the preparation of the cervical two thirds of curved canals after using two different endodontic rotary instruments, i.e., Gates-Glidden drills and Orifice Shaper. 20 mesial roots of mandibular molars were used and analyzed before and after instrumentation. The...
Main Authors: | , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Universidade Estadual de Campinas
2015-10-01
|
Series: | Brazilian Journal of Oral Sciences |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/bjos/article/view/8641105 |
id |
doaj-75e23f5ec545446fb5de6c72411558c2 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-75e23f5ec545446fb5de6c72411558c22021-07-15T14:03:09ZengUniversidade Estadual de CampinasBrazilian Journal of Oral Sciences1677-32252015-10-011310.20396/bjos.v1i3.8641105A computer evaluation of the dentin remaining after cervical preparation in curved canals: gates-glidden drills vs. orifice shaperTauby Coutinho Filho0Gustavo André De Deus Carneiro Vianna1Tatiana Guimarães Pinto2Eduardo Diogo Gurgel Filho3Cláudio Maniglia Ferreira4Rio de Janeiro State UniversityRio de Janeiro State UniversityRio de Janeiro State UniversityUNIFORUNIFORThe aim of this study was to evaluate the preparation of the cervical two thirds of curved canals after using two different endodontic rotary instruments, i.e., Gates-Glidden drills and Orifice Shaper. 20 mesial roots of mandibular molars were used and analyzed before and after instrumentation. The teeth were then placed in clear resin blocks and thus it was possible to remove the resin blocks from the mold, cut them 3 mm below the root bifurcation, and analyze the teeth. The blocks were then reassembled in the mold so that the canals could be instrumented. The area of the mesial canal and the least radicular thickness between furcation and mesial root were measured using an image analyzer computer program. The amount of dental tissue removed by the two instruments was greater towards the furcation. The mean area of the canals prepared with the GG drill was 0.63mm2 and the mean area of the canals prepared with the OS was 0.47mm2 . The average thickness between the mesiobuccal canal prepared by the GG drill and the furcation was 0.72mm and the average thickness between the mesiolingual canal instrumented by the OS and the furcation was 0.81mm. The remaining radicular thickness between the distal wall of the mesial root and the lumen of the canals prepared with either the Gates-Glidden drills or the Orifice Shaper was not significant (P>0.05).https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/bjos/article/view/8641105Cleaning and shapingGates-glidden drillOrifice shaperRoot canal |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Tauby Coutinho Filho Gustavo André De Deus Carneiro Vianna Tatiana Guimarães Pinto Eduardo Diogo Gurgel Filho Cláudio Maniglia Ferreira |
spellingShingle |
Tauby Coutinho Filho Gustavo André De Deus Carneiro Vianna Tatiana Guimarães Pinto Eduardo Diogo Gurgel Filho Cláudio Maniglia Ferreira A computer evaluation of the dentin remaining after cervical preparation in curved canals: gates-glidden drills vs. orifice shaper Brazilian Journal of Oral Sciences Cleaning and shaping Gates-glidden drill Orifice shaper Root canal |
author_facet |
Tauby Coutinho Filho Gustavo André De Deus Carneiro Vianna Tatiana Guimarães Pinto Eduardo Diogo Gurgel Filho Cláudio Maniglia Ferreira |
author_sort |
Tauby Coutinho Filho |
title |
A computer evaluation of the dentin remaining after cervical preparation in curved canals: gates-glidden drills vs. orifice shaper |
title_short |
A computer evaluation of the dentin remaining after cervical preparation in curved canals: gates-glidden drills vs. orifice shaper |
title_full |
A computer evaluation of the dentin remaining after cervical preparation in curved canals: gates-glidden drills vs. orifice shaper |
title_fullStr |
A computer evaluation of the dentin remaining after cervical preparation in curved canals: gates-glidden drills vs. orifice shaper |
title_full_unstemmed |
A computer evaluation of the dentin remaining after cervical preparation in curved canals: gates-glidden drills vs. orifice shaper |
title_sort |
computer evaluation of the dentin remaining after cervical preparation in curved canals: gates-glidden drills vs. orifice shaper |
publisher |
Universidade Estadual de Campinas |
series |
Brazilian Journal of Oral Sciences |
issn |
1677-3225 |
publishDate |
2015-10-01 |
description |
The aim of this study was to evaluate the preparation of the cervical two thirds of curved canals after using two different endodontic rotary instruments, i.e., Gates-Glidden drills and Orifice Shaper. 20 mesial roots of mandibular molars were used and analyzed before and after instrumentation. The teeth were then placed in clear resin blocks and thus it was possible to remove the resin blocks from the mold, cut them 3 mm below the root bifurcation, and analyze the teeth. The blocks were then reassembled in the mold so that the canals could be instrumented. The area of the mesial canal and the least radicular thickness between furcation and mesial root were measured using an image analyzer computer program. The amount of dental tissue removed by the two instruments was greater towards the furcation. The mean area of the canals prepared with the GG drill was 0.63mm2 and the mean area of the canals prepared with the OS was 0.47mm2 . The average thickness between the mesiobuccal canal prepared by the GG drill and the furcation was 0.72mm and the average thickness between the mesiolingual canal instrumented by the OS and the furcation was 0.81mm. The remaining radicular thickness between the distal wall of the mesial root and the lumen of the canals prepared with either the Gates-Glidden drills or the Orifice Shaper was not significant (P>0.05). |
topic |
Cleaning and shaping Gates-glidden drill Orifice shaper Root canal |
url |
https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/bjos/article/view/8641105 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT taubycoutinhofilho acomputerevaluationofthedentinremainingaftercervicalpreparationincurvedcanalsgatesgliddendrillsvsorificeshaper AT gustavoandrededeuscarneirovianna acomputerevaluationofthedentinremainingaftercervicalpreparationincurvedcanalsgatesgliddendrillsvsorificeshaper AT tatianaguimaraespinto acomputerevaluationofthedentinremainingaftercervicalpreparationincurvedcanalsgatesgliddendrillsvsorificeshaper AT eduardodiogogurgelfilho acomputerevaluationofthedentinremainingaftercervicalpreparationincurvedcanalsgatesgliddendrillsvsorificeshaper AT claudiomanigliaferreira acomputerevaluationofthedentinremainingaftercervicalpreparationincurvedcanalsgatesgliddendrillsvsorificeshaper AT taubycoutinhofilho computerevaluationofthedentinremainingaftercervicalpreparationincurvedcanalsgatesgliddendrillsvsorificeshaper AT gustavoandrededeuscarneirovianna computerevaluationofthedentinremainingaftercervicalpreparationincurvedcanalsgatesgliddendrillsvsorificeshaper AT tatianaguimaraespinto computerevaluationofthedentinremainingaftercervicalpreparationincurvedcanalsgatesgliddendrillsvsorificeshaper AT eduardodiogogurgelfilho computerevaluationofthedentinremainingaftercervicalpreparationincurvedcanalsgatesgliddendrillsvsorificeshaper AT claudiomanigliaferreira computerevaluationofthedentinremainingaftercervicalpreparationincurvedcanalsgatesgliddendrillsvsorificeshaper |
_version_ |
1721300335994077184 |