TY - JOUR
T1 - Evaluation of apical debris removal using various sizes and tapers of ProFile GT files
AU - Albrecht, Lynn J.
AU - Baumgartner, J. Craig
AU - Marshall, J. Gordon
PY - 2004/6
Y1 - 2004/6
N2 - The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of preparation taper using size #20 or size #40 ProFile GT files on the ability to introduce irrigant and remove debris from root canals. Forty-eight bilaterally matched pairs of extracted teeth were instrumented using .04-, .06-, .08-, and .10-tapered files with one tooth of each pair enlarged to size #20 and the other to size #40. The teeth were sectioned at 1 mm and 3 mm from the apex, and the amount of remaining debris was calculated as a percentage of the total lumen area. The following variables were evaluated: apical preparation size, preparation taper, total volume of irrigation, depth of irrigation needle penetration, and number of instrument changes needed to reach working length. Compared with the size #40 preparations, a significantly greater percentage of remaining debris was observed in the size #20 preparations at the 1-mm level for all tapers except the .10 taper group in which there was no significant difference (p = 0.982). There were no significant differences between any groups at 3 mm. Results suggest that debris is more effectively removed using .04, .06, and .08 ProFile GT instruments when the apical preparation size is larger (size #40) compared with size #20 apical preparations. When a taper of .10 can be produced at the apical extent of the canal, there is no difference in debris removal between the two preparations sizes.
AB - The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of preparation taper using size #20 or size #40 ProFile GT files on the ability to introduce irrigant and remove debris from root canals. Forty-eight bilaterally matched pairs of extracted teeth were instrumented using .04-, .06-, .08-, and .10-tapered files with one tooth of each pair enlarged to size #20 and the other to size #40. The teeth were sectioned at 1 mm and 3 mm from the apex, and the amount of remaining debris was calculated as a percentage of the total lumen area. The following variables were evaluated: apical preparation size, preparation taper, total volume of irrigation, depth of irrigation needle penetration, and number of instrument changes needed to reach working length. Compared with the size #40 preparations, a significantly greater percentage of remaining debris was observed in the size #20 preparations at the 1-mm level for all tapers except the .10 taper group in which there was no significant difference (p = 0.982). There were no significant differences between any groups at 3 mm. Results suggest that debris is more effectively removed using .04, .06, and .08 ProFile GT instruments when the apical preparation size is larger (size #40) compared with size #20 apical preparations. When a taper of .10 can be produced at the apical extent of the canal, there is no difference in debris removal between the two preparations sizes.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=3042610307&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=3042610307&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/00004770-200406000-00012
DO - 10.1097/00004770-200406000-00012
M3 - Article
C2 - 15167472
AN - SCOPUS:3042610307
SN - 0099-2399
VL - 30
SP - 425
EP - 428
JO - Journal of Endodontics
JF - Journal of Endodontics
IS - 6
ER -