• Logo
  • SBMUJournals

Comparing the Coronal Flaring Efficacy of Five Different Instruments Using Cone-Beam Computed Tomography

Amin Homayoon, Mahmood Reza Hamidi, Azam haddadi, Zahra Sadat Madani, Ehsan Moudi, Ali Bijani




Introduction: Fearless removal of tooth structure during canal preparation and shaping has negative effects on the prognosis of treatment. On the other hand, sufficient pre-enlargement facilitates exact measurement of the apical size. The present in vitro study aimed to compare the efficacy of Gates-Glidden drills, K3, ProTaper, FlexMaster and RaCe instruments in dentin removal during coronal flaring using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Methods and Materials: A total of 40 mandibular molars were selected and the coronal areas of their mesiobuccal and mesiolingual root canals were randomly prepared with either mentioned instruments. Pre- and post-instrumentation CBCT images were taken and the thickness of canal walls was measured in 1.5- and 3-mm distances from the furcation area. Data were analyzed using the one-way ANOVA. Tukey’s post hoc tests were used for two-by-two comparisons. Results: At 1.5-mm distance, there was no significant difference between different instruments. However, at 3-mm distances, Gates-Glidden drills removed significantly more dentin compared to FlexMaster files (mean=0.18 mm) (P<0.02); however, two-by-two comparisons did not reveal any significant differences between the other groups. Conclusion: All tested instruments can be effectively used in clinical settings for coronal pre-enlargement.

Keywords: Cone-Beam Computed Tomography; Coronal Flaring; Coronal Pre-Enlargement; Root Canal Treatment; Root Canal Preparation

DOI: https://doi.org/10.22037/iej.v10i4.8523


  • There are currently no refbacks.