Comparative Evaluation of Cleaning Efficacy of Two Rotary Systems with Conventional K File in Root Canals of Primary Teeth | ||
| Al-Azhar Journal of Dentistry | ||
| Volume 11, Issue 2, April 2024, Pages 41-45 PDF (492.44 K) | ||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||
| DOI: 10.58675/2974-4164.1621 | ||
| Authors | ||
| Hind I. Okasha1; Mohammed H. Mostafa2; Shymaa A. Elshishiny3 | ||
| 1Master student at Al-Azhar University, Girls Branch | ||
| 2Assistant Professor and Head of Pedodontic and Oral Health Department, Faculty of Dental Medicine for Girls Al-Azhar University, Egypt. | ||
| 3Lecturer of Pedodontic and Oral Health Department, Faculty of Dental Medicine for Girls Al-Azhar University, Egypt. | ||
| Abstract | ||
| Purpose: comparison of cleaning quality and instrumentation time between manual instrumentation with that of rotary systems (Kedo SG and AF fanta baby) in the preparation of deciduous root canals. (In vitro study). Materials and methods: A total of thirty extracted primary canines were divided into 3 groups each one consists of 10 teeth group I were manually prepared using stainless steel K-files (Mani) group II were cleaned with Rotary file system Kedo‑SG blue group III were prepared with Rotary file system (AF Baby file system). The samples were prepared for SEM analysis by using a stainless steel chisel, to split each sample in two. Photomicrographs of each canal’s cervical, middle and apical thirds were taken for the final assessment. This was done with a magnification of 350x (for debris score) and 1500x (for the smear layer).Results: According to debris and smear layer scale the results were in favor of two rotary systems with statistically significant difference between fanta and kedo groups with manual files. Conclusion: using rotary files to prepare primary teeth is superior to using manual K-files. This is due to shortened work time, improving children’s compliance. Additionally, they have reasonable cleaning capacity. | ||
| Keywords | ||
| K- file. Rotary files; debris & smear layer; SEM | ||
|
Statistics Article View: 30 PDF Download: 10 |
||
