Microtomographic Assessment of the Shaping Ability of the Hyflex CM and XP-endo Shaper Systems in Curved Root Canals

Abstract Objective This study compared the shaping ability of the Hyflex CM and XP-endo Shaper rotary file systems in curved mesial canals of mandibular molars using micro-computed tomography. Material and Methods Seventeen mesial roots of extracted first mandibular molars with two independent mesia...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:European journal of dentistry 2023-07, Vol.17 (3), p.699-705
Main Authors: Dantas, Wania Christina Figueiredo, Marceliano-Alves, Marilia Fagury Videira, Marceliano, Eduardo Fagury Videira, Marques, Eduardo Fernandes, de Carvalho Coutinho, Thais Machado, Alves, Flavio R.F., Martin, Alexandre Sigrist De, Pelegrine, Rina Andrea, Lopes, Ricardo Tadeu, Bueno, Carlos Eduardo da Silveira
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Original
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Abstract Objective This study compared the shaping ability of the Hyflex CM and XP-endo Shaper rotary file systems in curved mesial canals of mandibular molars using micro-computed tomography. Material and Methods Seventeen mesial roots of extracted first mandibular molars with two independent mesial canals were scanned before and after root canal preparation with the tested rotatory file systems. Each mesial canal from the same specimen was prepared with one of the two systems. The parameters analyzed were canal centering (transportation) for the cervical, middle, and apical segments, as well as for the entire canal (0–10 mm from the apex); and canal volume increase, canal surface area increase, and unprepared canal walls for two segments, 0 to 4 mm and 0 to 10 mm from the apex. Results There was no significant difference between both systems regarding canal centering (transportation), volume increase, and unprepared canal walls for the 0 to 10 mm segment (p> 0.05); however, a significant difference was observed for the 0 to 4 mm segment (p
ISSN:1305-7456
1305-7464
DOI:10.1055/s-0042-1750694