Publication:
Comparison of Protaper Next and Hyflex Instruments on Apical Debris Extrusion in Curved Canals

dc.authorscopusid56344198500
dc.authorscopusid56221938900
dc.authorscopusid36020260100
dc.authorscopusid51764330800
dc.authorscopusid57063386700
dc.contributor.authorKoçak, M.M.
dc.contributor.authorÇiçek, E.
dc.contributor.authorKoçak, S.
dc.contributor.authorSaǧlam, B.C.
dc.contributor.authorFuruncuoǧlu, F.
dc.date.accessioned2020-06-21T13:31:59Z
dc.date.available2020-06-21T13:31:59Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.departmentOndokuz Mayıs Üniversitesien_US
dc.department-temp[Koçak] Mustafa Murat, Department of Endodontics, Zonguldak Bulent Ecevit University, Zonguldak, Zonguldak, Turkey; [Çiçek] Ersan, Department of Endodontics, Zonguldak Bulent Ecevit University, Zonguldak, Zonguldak, Turkey; [Koçak] Sibel, Department of Endodontics, Zonguldak Bulent Ecevit University, Zonguldak, Zonguldak, Turkey; [Saǧlam] Baran Can, Department of Endodontics, Zonguldak Bulent Ecevit University, Zonguldak, Zonguldak, Turkey; [Furuncuoǧlu] Fatma, Department of Endodontics, Ondokuz Mayis Üniversitesi, Samsun, Turkeyen_US
dc.description.abstractAIM: To evaluate the amount of apically extruded debris after root canal instrumentation with ProTaper Next and HyFlex instruments in curved root canals.METHODOLOGY: Forty extracted mandibular first molar teeth with curved mesial roots and of similar lengths were instrumented using ProTaper Next or HyFlex instruments. The extruded debris was collected into pre-weighed Eppendorf tubes. The tubes were stored in an incubator at 68 °C for 5 days. The tubes were weighed to obtain the final dry weight of the extruded debris. The weight of the extruded debris was determined by subtracting the initial weight from the final weight. Distribution of data was determined by Shapiro-Wilk test. Continuous variables were compared with the Independent Sample t-test or Mann-Whitney U-test. The significance level was set at P = 0.05.RESULTS: Both instruments were associated with apical debris extrusion. The HyFlex group had significantly less debris extrusion than the ProTaper Next group (P = 0.014).CONCLUSION: HyFlex CM was associated with significantly less apical extrusion than ProTaper Next. © 2015 International Endodontic Journal. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/iej.12552
dc.identifier.endpage1000en_US
dc.identifier.issn0143-2885
dc.identifier.issn1365-2591
dc.identifier.issue10en_US
dc.identifier.pmid26383696
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-84988503947
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ1
dc.identifier.startpage996en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1111/iej.12552
dc.identifier.volume49en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000384770800010
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ1
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherWileyen_US
dc.relation.ispartofInternational Endodontic Journalen_US
dc.relation.journalInternational Endodontic Journalen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subjectApical Debris Extrusionen_US
dc.subjectCurved Canalen_US
dc.subjectHyFlex CMen_US
dc.subjectProTaper Nexten_US
dc.titleComparison of Protaper Next and Hyflex Instruments on Apical Debris Extrusion in Curved Canalsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication

Files