Issues‎ > ‎vol1n2‎ > ‎


Conservation of dentin thickness in the root canals orifice following two preparation techniques

Ranjdar Mahmood Talabani , Shawbo Muhamad Ahmad & Arass Jalal Noori

College of Dentistry, University of Sulaimani



Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the amount of dentine removed after canal preparation using ProTaper (PT) and Greater Taper (GT) rotary instruments.

Materials and methods:
Twenty extracted human teeth with single roots were selected and sectioned at the level of CEJ. The roots were distributed in two groups (n= 20) using stratified randomization, and prepared under simulated clinical conditions with ProTaper (PT) and Greater Taper (GT) rotary NiTi system. The pre- and post-preparation photographs were traced and superimposed, dentin thickness was measured at the levels of canal periphery, canal area, tooth area, mesial dentin thickness, distal dentin thickness, buccal dentin thickness and lingual dentin thickness both before and after preparation.

The thickness of removed dentin was significantly different between the two preparation techniques (p<0.01) at the level of both tooth and canal area with more conservation for GT system while ProTaper system more conservative at buccolingual width than mesiodistal width, and GT system was more conservative at mesiodistal dimension than buccolingual dimension.

GT rotary instrumentation prepares root canals has greater conservation of dentine structure on the overall dimensions of the root, while the ProTaper system is more conservative at buccolingual dimension.

Keywords: Dentine wall thickness, GT and ProTaper, Nickel Titanium rotary systems, root canal dimensions.

Full Article - PDF


1.    Lammertyn PA and Sierra LG. Dentine thickness in buccal roots of maxillary first premolars following preparation with three techniques. International magazine of endodontology. 2012; 8 (3): 30-5. 

2.    Plotino G, Grande NM, Falanga A, Di Giuseppe IL, Lamorgese V and Somma F. Dentine removal in the coronal portion of root canals following two preparation techniques. Int Endod J. 2007; 40: 852-8.

3.    Sathorn C, Palamara JEA, Palamara D and Messer. Effect of root canal size and external root surface morphology on fracture susceptibility and pattern: A Finite Element Analysis. JOE. 2005; 31: 288-92.

4.    Vats A, Punja A, Hegde P, Hegde MN, Bains R and Loomba K. Evaluation of effect of root canal preparation techniques on inducing root fractures: An in vitro study. Asian J Oral Health Allied Sci. 2011; 1: 17-21.

5.    Dong Choi S, Uk Jin M, Ok Kim K and Kyo Kim S.

Shaping ability of four rotary nickel-titanium instruments to prepare root canal at danger zone. J Kor Acad Cons Dent. 2004; 29:446-53.

6.    Yoldas O, Yilmaz S, Atakan G, Kuden Cand Kasan Z. Dentinal microcrack formation during root canal preparations by different NiTi rotary instruments and the self-adjusting file. J Endod. 2012; 38 (2): 232-35.

7.    Grande NM, Plotino G, Butti A, Messina F, Pameijer CH and Somma F. Cross-sectional analysis of root canals prepared with NiTi rotary instruments and stainless steel reciprocating files. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2007; 103:120-6.

8.    Gluskin AH, Brown DC and Buchanan LS. A reconstructed computerized tomographic comparison of Ni–Ti rotary GT™ files versus traditional instruments in canals shaped by novice operators. Int Endod J. 2001; 34: 476–484.

9.    Buchanan LS. ProSystem GT: design, technique and advantages. Endod Topics. 2005; 10: 168–75.

10.  Akhlaghi NM, Kahali R, Abtahi A, Tabatabaee S, Mehrvarzfar P and Parirokh M. Comparison of dentine removal using V-taper and K-Flexofile instruments. Int Endod J. 2010; 43:1029-36.

11.  Saeed MH, Bardestani Z, El Sadek DA and Ismail AI. Influnces of hands stainless steel and NiTi rotary file on the resistance to fracture of endodontic treated roots. IJRSR. 2014; 5: 660 -4.

12.  El Hilaly Eid and Amin SA. Changes in diameter, crosssectional area, and extent of canal-wall touching on using 3 instrumentation techniques in long-oval canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2011; 112:688-95.