Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract Background The preparation of the middle mesial (MM) canal of mandibular molars represents a challenge because it is often curved, narrow, and close to the root concave. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the ex vivo shaping ability of 3 nickel-titanium (NiTi) rotary systems in the MM canal using 3D printed resin tooth replicas. Methods A permanent mandibular first molar with a MM canal was acquired from a pool of extracted teeth and reproduced by a 3D printer. The resin tooth replicas ( n = 18) were equally assigned to 3 groups for the evaluation of the shaping abilities of 3 NiTi rotary systems (OneShape OS, Twisted Files TF, and ProTaper Gold PTG) according to the manufacturer’s recommendations. The tooth replicas were scanned by micro-computed tomography (micro-CT) twice before and after instrumentation of the mesiobuccal (MB), mesiolingual (ML), and MM root canals. After 3D reconstruction, the canal straightening, change of root canal volume and surface area, the mesial and distal canal wall thickness and canal transportation at the levels of 1, 2, and 3 mm below furcation were assessed. One-way variance analysis and Turkey’s post hoc test were used for comparisons of the means among different groups, and paired- t test was used to compare the mesial and distal sides of the mesial roots. Results As compared with OS and TF, the use of PTG in preparation of MM canals resulted in significantly more straightening of canal curvature ( p 0.05) after the preparation of the MB and ML canals. However, in the MM canal, more pronounced transportation was detected in the PTG group at 2 mm below furcation, and in the TF group at 3 mm below furcation as compared with the other 2 systems (both p < 0.05). Conclusions 3D printed tooth replicas have the advantages of consistency and can be an ideal model to evaluate the shaping ability of different instruments in the MM canal. OS and TF files performed similarly and both are appropriate for shaping the MM canal, while PTG may cause excessive and uneven resin removal, especially near the furcation, and may lead to root fragility and procedural errors.
Zhu et al. (Sat,) studied this question.