Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to compare in-vitro the amount of debris extruded apically from extracted teeth, using K3, Protaper rotary instruments and manual step-back technique. METHODS: Forty five human single-rooted mandibular premolar teeth were randomly divided into 3 groups. The teeth in 3 groups were instrumented until reaching the working length with K3, Protaper rotary instruments and K-type stainless steel instruments with manual step-back technique, respectively. Debris extruded from the apical foramen was collected into centrifuge tubes and the amount was determined. The data obtained were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis one-way analysis of variance and Mann-Whitney U tests, with P=.05 as the level for statistical significance. RESULTS: Statistically significant difference was observed between K3, Protaper and step-back groups in terms of debris extrusion (P<.05). Step-back group had the highest mean debris weight, which was significantly different from the K3 and Protaper groups (P<.05). The lowest mean debris weight was related to K3 group, which was significantly different from the Protaper group (P<.05). CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results, all instrumentation techniques produced debris extrusion. The engine-driven Ni-Ti systems extruded significantly less apical debris than step-back technique. However, Protaper rotary instruments extruded significantly more debris than K3 rotary instruments.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kuştarcı et al. (2008) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: