Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This study aimed to evaluate and compare the shaping abilities and minimum dentin thickness of minimally invasive rotary instruments via micro‐computed tomography. Twelve 3D‐printed C‐shaped canal models from a mandibular molar were divided into two groups, and root canals were prepared with either XP‐endo Rise (XR) or TruNatomy (TN) systems. Pre‐ and post‐preparation evaluations included canal volume, prepared area and minimum dentin thickness. No significant differences were found in canal volume change (XR: 22.66 ± 4.28%, TN: 23.02 ± 5.10%), prepared canal area (XR: 31.86 ± 10.72%, TN: 30.26 ± 11.59%) and minimum dentin thickness (XR: 0.30 ± 0.05 mm, TN: 0.28 ± 0.05 mm) between groups ( p > 0.05). The canal volume change in the middle third was significantly higher than that in the coronal and apical thirds ( p < 0.05) in both groups. In conclusion, XR demonstrated comparable shaping abilities and minimum dentin thickness to TN in preparing 3D‐printed C‐shaped canals.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Supavititpattana et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: