title: Cleaning efficiency of anatomic endodontic technology, ProFile System and Manual Instrumentation in oval-shaped root canals: an in vitro study.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  This in vitro study is an attempt to compare the effectiveness in cleaning oval shaped root canals using Anatomic Endodontic Technology (AET®), ProFile system® and Manual Instrumentation with K-files.
  
  
  METHODS
  Sixty oval shaped single rooted maxillary and mandibular premolars with straight canals were divided in to three groups. The root canals were, confirmed as being oval shape by means of radiographs made in a buccolingual and mesiodistal direction. Automated canal preparation was performed using Anatomic Endodontic Technology (group 1) and the ProFile system® (group 2). Manual instrumentation (group 3) was performed with k-files. Irrigation was performed using alternatively 3% NaOCl and 17% EDTA, followed by rinsing with normal saline. The roots were split longitudinally into two halves and examined under a scanning electron microscope. The presence of debris and smear layer was recorded at distances 1, 5 and 10 mm from the working length using a three step scoring scale. Mean scores for debris and smear layer was calculated and statistically analyzed for between and within groups significance, using the Kruskal-Wallis nonparametric ANOVA test and Bonferroni's multiple comparison test.
  
  
  RESULTS
  At 1, 5 and 10 mm levels the root canals prepared with AET had significantly less surface debris and smear layer on the canal walls as compared to canals prepared with ProFile system® or manual instrumentation. For all three groups significantly lower mean smear layer scores (p < 0.05) were recorded at 5 and 10 mm levels compared with the 1 mm level. Significantly lower mean debris scores (p < 0.05) were also recorded at 5 and 10 mm levels for the AET group whereas no significant differences were found between the three levels for the ProFile system® and manual instrumentation groups.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Although better instrumentation scores were obtained in canals prepared with AET, complete cleanliness was not achieved with any of the techniques and instruments investigated.
authors.affiliation: Reader, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics SVS Institute of Dental Sciences, Mahabubnagar, Andhra Pradesh, India.
authors.forename: E Sujayeendranath
authors.initials: ES
authors.lastname: Reddy
authors.forename: Dinapadu
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Sainath
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Narenderreddy
authors.forename: Srikanth
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Pasari
authors.forename: Sangeetha
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Vallikanthan
authors.forename: G
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Sindhurareddy
mesh_terms: D001641:Bicuspid / Q000648:ultrastructure; D003786:Dental Pulp Cavity / Q000648:ultrastructure*; D003804:Dentin / Q000648:ultrastructure; D004492:Edetic Acid / Q000627:therapeutic use; D004867:Equipment Design; D006801:Humans; D008855:Microscopy, Electron, Scanning; D012388:Root Canal Irrigants / Q000627:therapeutic use; D018915:Root Canal Preparation / Q000295:instrumentation* / Q000379:methods / Q000592:standards; D016369:Smear Layer; D012965:Sodium Chloride / Q000627:therapeutic use; D012973:Sodium Hypochlorite / Q000627:therapeutic use; D013674:Technology, Dental / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000592:standards
chemical_list: D012388:Root Canal Irrigants; D012965:Sodium Chloride; D004492:Edetic Acid; D012973:Sodium Hypochlorite