Dental Journal of Advance Studies

Register      Login

VOLUME 12 , ISSUE 1 ( January-April, 2024 ) > List of Articles


Comparative Evaluation of ProTaper Gold, TruNatomy, and XP-endo Shaper Instruments on Dentinal Microcrack Formation: Scanning Electron Microscope Study

Iflah Javed, Rishika Thakur, Sameer Makkar, Shabnam Negi, Neha Menrai, Vanshish Sankhyan

Keywords : Dentin, Electron scanning microscopy, Endodontics, Nickel–titanium alloy, Root canal

Citation Information : Javed I, Thakur R, Makkar S, Negi S, Menrai N, Sankhyan V. Comparative Evaluation of ProTaper Gold, TruNatomy, and XP-endo Shaper Instruments on Dentinal Microcrack Formation: Scanning Electron Microscope Study. 2024; 12 (1):8-12.

DOI: 10.5005/djas-11014-0036

License: CC BY-NC-ND 4.0

Published Online: 30-04-2024

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2024; The Author(s).


Aim: The aim of this study was to compare dentinal crack formation in root canal walls after instrumentation with TruNatomy (TN), XP-endo Shaper (XP), and ProTaper Gold (PTG) files under a scanning electron microscope (SEM). Materials and methods: A total of 24 single-rooted teeth were selected. Teeth with any detectable fractures or cracks, calcifications, or previous root canal procedures were excluded. The teeth were randomly divided into three experimental groups (n = 8) as follows: Group A: TN, Group B: PTG, Group C: XP. Following root canal procedures, irrigation with water was used to section the roots at 3, 6, and 9 mm from the apex. To check for cracks, the pieces were examined under an SEM at a magnification of 100× in all directions. The data were analyzed using the Chi-square test. Results: ProTaper Gold produced a greater number of cracks than TN and XP files. There was a statistically significant difference in microcracks produced by PTG, XP-endo, and TN at coronal and apical levels (p = 0.001), while at middle level it was non-significant. Conclusion: All files produced dentin cracks, however, PTG produced the highest number of cracks, followed by TN and XP.

  1. Seltzer S, Naidorf IJ. Flare-ups in endodontics: I. etiological factors. J Endod 1985;11(11):472–478. DOI: 10.1016/S0099-2399(85)80220-X.
  2. Tsesis I, Rosen E, Tamse A, et al. Diagnosis of vertical root fractures in endodontically treated teeth based on clinical and radiographic indices: A systematic review. J Endod 2010;36(9):1455–1458. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2010.05.003.
  3. Yoldas O, Yilmaz S, Atakan G, et al. Dentinal microcrack formation during root canal preparations by different NiTi rotary instruments and the self-adjusting file. J Endod 2012;38(2):232–235. DOI: 10.1016/j. joen.2011.10.011.
  4. Kim HC, Lee MH, Yum J, et al. Potential relationship between design of nickel-titanium rotary instruments and vertical root fracture. J Endod 2010;36(7):1195–1199. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2010.02.010.
  5. Bier CA, Shemesh H, Tanomaru-Filho M, et al. The ability of different nickel-titanium rotary instruments to induce dentinal damage during canal preparation. J Endod 2009;35(2):236–238. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2008.10.021.
  6. Burklein S, Hinschitza K, Dammaschke T, et al. Shaping ability and cleaning effectiveness of two single-file systems in severely curved root canals of extracted teeth: Recproc and WaveOne versus Mtwo and ProTaper. Int Endod J 2012;45(5):449–461. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2011.01996.x.
  7. Shemesh H, Roeleveld AC, Wesselink PR, et al. Damage to root dentin during retreatment procedures. J Endod 2011;37(1):63–66. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2010.10.002.
  8. Plotino G, Grande NM, Mercadé Bellido M, et al. Influence of temperature on cyclic fatigue resistance of ProTaper Gold and ProTaper universal rotary files. J Endod 2017;43(2):200–202. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2016.10.014.
  9. Pacheco-Yanes J, Gazzaneo I, Perez AR, et al. Transportation assessment in artificial curved canals after instrumentation with Reciproc, Reciproc Blue, and XP-endo Shaper Systems. J Investig Clin Dent 2019;10(3):e12417. DOI: 10.1111/jicd.12417.
  10. Kesim B, Sagsen B, Aslan T. Evaluation of dentinal defects during root canal preparation using thermomechanically processed nickel-titanium files. Eur J Dent 2017;11(02):157–161. DOI: 10.4103/ejd.ejd_254_16.
  11. Priya NT, Chandrasekhar V, Anita S, et al. “Dentinal microcracks after root canal preparation” a comparative evaluation with hand, rotary and reciprocating instrumentation. J Clin Diag Res 2014;8(12): ZC70–72. DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2014/11437.5349.
  12. De-Deus G, Leal Vieira VT, Nogueira da Silva EJ, et al. Bending resistance and dynamic and static cyclic fatigue life of Reciproc and WaveOne large instruments. J Endod 2014;40(4):575–579. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2013.10.013.
  13. Liu R, Hou BX, Wesselink PR, et al. The incidence of root microcracks caused by 3 different single-file systems versus the ProTaper system. J Endod 2013;39(8):1054–1056. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2013.04.013.
  14. Adorno CG, Yoshioka T, Suda H. Crack initiation on the apical root surface caused by three different nickel-titanium rotary files at different working lengths. J Endod 2011;37(4):522–225. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2010.12.002.
  15. Wilcox LR, Roskelley C, Sutton T. The relationship of root canal enlargement to finger-spreader induced vertical root fracture. J Endod 1997;23(8):533–534. DOI: 10.1016/S0099-2399(97)80316-0.
  16. Versiani M, Souza E, De-Deus G. Critical appraisal of studies on dentinal radicular microcracks in endodontics: Methodological issues, contemporary concepts, and future perspectives. Endod Topics 2005;33(1):87–156. DOI: 10.1111/etp.12091.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.