Lifespan of three single file nickel-titanium rotary systems in simulated curved canals / Mina Aziz Abdou Shenouda ; Supervised Siza Yacoub Zakhari , Wafaa Ahmed Omar Segari
Material type: TextLanguage: English Publication details: Cairo : Mina Aziz Abdou Shenouda , 2016Description: 82 P. : photographs ; 25cmOther title:- عمر ثلاثة من أنظمة النيكل تيتانيوم الدوارة ذات المبرد الواحد باستخدام القنوات المنحنية المحاكية [Added title page title]
- Issued also as CD
Item type | Current library | Home library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Date due | Barcode | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Thesis | قاعة الرسائل الجامعية - الدور الاول | المكتبة المركزبة الجديدة - جامعة القاهرة | Cai01.09.02.M.Sc.2016.Mi.L (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | Not for loan | 01010110071290000 | |||
CD - Rom | مخـــزن الرســائل الجـــامعية - البدروم | المكتبة المركزبة الجديدة - جامعة القاهرة | Cai01.09.02.M.Sc.2016.Mi.L (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 71290.CD | Not for loan | 01020110071290000 |
Thesis (M.Sc.) - Cairo University - Faculty of Oral and Dental Medicine - Department of Endodontics
The purpose of the present study was to compare the lifespan and deformation of three single file nickel titanium rotary instruments: ProTaper F2, wave one primary and one shape when used in simulated curved canals. A total of fifteen defect-free instruments were divided into three equal groups according to the instruments' type. The selected instruments were used to prepare simulated canals embedded in resin blocks, which had a 45 o angle and a 6 mm radius of curvature. Both ProTaper F2 and wave one primary files were activated in a reciprocation motion using angles of reciprocation of 150o CW/30 o CCW and 150 o CCW/30 o CW respectively; whereas, the One Shape files were used in a continuous rotation. Each instrument was repeatedly used till the incidence of fracture, and the mean lifespan was determined for each group. Naked eye inspection and stereomicroscope examination were performed to examine the instruments for defects following each canal preparation, where the incidence, type, and progress of deformation for each instrument were recorded. Also, the canal preparation time was determined, and the mean time for canal preparation for each group was calculated. The ProTaper F2 and wave one primary instruments showed no significant difference in the mean lifespan, whereas, one shape instrument had a significantly longer lifespan. There was no significant difference between ProTaper F2 and wave one primary instruments regarding the incidence of cracks, while One Shape instrument showed a significantly delayed incidence of cracks in comparison to both instruments
Issued also as CD
There are no comments on this title.