Correlation of the diameter preparation of a new generation of NiTi instrument with the dimensions of gutta-percha points of its old generation through a morphometric analysis

Abstract

Objective: The aim of the present study was to verify if the Protaper Next instruments X1, X2, and X3 and the Protaper Universal gutta-percha cones F1, F2, and F3 meet the ANSI/ADA 101 and 78 recommendations. Material and Methods: The instruments’ dimensions were compared with those obtained by the gutta-percha cones. For this, ten instruments and ten cones of each type were used. Micromorphometric images were obtained and analyzed through a stereomicroscope (OptiCam) and measurements were obtained with TSView software, version 7.2.1.7. The D3, D6, and D9 diameters were compared with the nominal diameters using the Student's t-test. After this, the real diameters of the instruments D3, D6, and D9 were compared with the gutta-percha cone diameters by Anova supplemented with SNK test for multiple comparisons. A p ?0.05 was considered significant. Results: The results showed statistically significant differences between the real diameter and nominal diameter of the instruments (p <0.05). The X3 instrument showed a statistically significant difference when compared to the F1 cone (p <0.05), and the cone values were lower than the instrument values. Conclusion: Within the limitations of this study, it can be concluded that: 1) the X1 instrument and the gutta-percha points did not meet the recommendations, and 2) the F1 cone can be an option for filling the modeled channels with the X3 instrument, but termoplastification is required.