Amal Hassan Zaki Youssef , Nihal Ezzat And Heba El Asfouri ,
ABSTRACT
The Aim Of The Present Study Was To Compare Between Protaper Gold, WaveOne Gold And Protaper Universal Regarding Apically Extruded Debris And Geometric Analysis Including Change In Dentin Thickness, Canal Straightening, Centering Ratio, And Canal Transportation.)
Materials and Methods: A Total Number Of 21 Distal Root Canals Were Selected And Randomly Divided Into Three Groups For Evaluation Of Apical Extrusion Of Debris Using A Modified Version Of The Experimental Model Described By Myers And Montgomery. Root Canals Were Prepared According To The Manufacturer?s Instructions Using Protaper Gold (PTG) For Group I, WaveOne Gold (WOG) For Group II And Protaper Universal (PTU) For Group III. A Total Number Of 63 Mesial Root Canals (mesio-buccal And Mesio-lingual) Were Selected And Randomly Divided Into Three Groups For Evaluation Of Geometric Analysis Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT). Root Canals Were Prepared According To The Manufacturer?s Instructions Using Protaper Gold (PTG) For Group I, WaveOne Gold (WOG) For Group II And Protaper Universal (PTU) For Group III. Data Was Statistically Analyzed Using One-way ANOVA And Significance Level Was Set At P < 0.05.
Results: Regarding Evaluation Of Apically Extruded Debris, There Was No Statistically Significant Difference Between Protaper Gold Group And WaveOne Gold Group (P > 0.05). However, There Was Statistically Significant Difference Between Protaper Universal Group And The Other Two Groups (Protaper Gold And WaveOne Gold) (P < 0.05). Regarding Geometric Analysis, There Was No Statistically Significant Difference Between The Three Groups (P < 0.05).
Conclusion: Within The Limitation Of The Present Study, It Can Be Concluded That: All The Tested Instruments Showed A Considerable Amount Of Apically Extruded Debris And Failed To Completely Preserve The Geometric Configuration Of The Root Canals.