Iranian Endodontic Journal

Abstract

Introduction: This study compared apical transportation and centering ability of TruNatomy, EDMax, and Reciproc Blue in curved mesiobuccal canals of mandibular molars. Materials and Methods: This ex vivo study was conducted on curved (20-40 degrees) mesiobuccal canals of 60 mandibular molars. The teeth were randomly assigned to 4 groups (n=15) for instrumentation of the mesiobuccal canals with (I) TruNatomy, (II) EDMax, (III) Reciproc Blue, and (IV) Reciproc Blue+R-Pilot. Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans were obtained before and after instrumentation. Changes in canal wall thickness in mesiodistal (MD) and buccolingual (BL) directions were assessed at 1, 2, 3, and 4 mm from the apex using OnDemand software. Data were analyzed by the Kruskal-Wallis, Bonferroni, Friedman, and Fisher’s exact tests (alpha=0.05). Results: TruNatomy showed significantly lower transportation than Reciproc Blue and EDMax in the apical, middle, and coronal thirds (P<0.05). Reciproc Blue and EDMax had no significant difference in transportation (P>0.05). Using the R-Pilot glider had no significant effect on transportation (P>0.05). Canal transportation was not significantly different within each group at four distances from the apex (P>0.05). TruNatomy showed significantly higher centering ability than Reciproc Blue+R-Pilot in the BL dimension at 3 mm from the apex (P<0.05). Conclusion: TruNatomy showed significantly lower canal transportation than Reciproc Blue and EDMax at all distances from the apex. The files had no significant difference in centering ability except at 3 mm in BL dimension, where TruNatomy had significantly higher centering ability than Reciproc Blue+R-Pilot.