SavedAdd your journal

Journals / ADO Klinik Bilimler Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 15 Sayı: 1

Comparison of Canal Shaping and Transportation Between the Protaper Next and Protaper Ultimate in Simulated Double-curved Canals

Simüle Edilmiş Çift Kurvatürlü Kanallarda Protaper Next ve Protaper Ultimate Eğeleri Arasındaki Kanal Şekillendirme ve Transportasyonunun Karşılaştırması

Seher Pelda Biçer(SAĞLIK BİLİMLERİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ, DİŞ HEKİMLİĞİ FAKÜLTESİ)0009-0000-8846-9708
Betül Aycan Uysal(SAĞLIK BİLİMLERİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ, HAMİDİYE DİŞ HEKİMLİĞİ FAKÜLTESİ, HAMİDİYE DİŞ HEKİMLİĞİ PR.)0000-0002-6113-6927
Pages
47–54
Publication Date
2026-01-27
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The PTU group may lead to transportation in the apical curvature.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: To compare the canal shaping and transportation caused by the Protaper Next (PTN) and Protaper Ultimate (PTU) file systems in artificially created double-curved canals.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Material and Method: Thirty double-curved canals in clear resin blocks were prepared up to an apical size of #25 using PTN and PTU instruments.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The PTU group may lead to transportation in the apical curvature.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Kök kanal preparasyonu · Kök kanal tedavisi · Kök kanal transportasyonu

Abstract

Aim: To compare the canal shaping and transportation caused by the Protaper Next (PTN) and Protaper Ultimate (PTU) file systems in artificially created double-curved canals. Material and Method: Thirty double-curved canals in clear resin blocks were prepared up to an apical size of #25 using PTN and PTU instruments. Resin blocks were filled with ink and photographed before and after instrumentation to develop composite images by superimposition. Shaping ability and transportation of the canals were evaluated. Student’s t-test and Mann Whitney U test was used (p<0.05). Results: Compared with the PTU system, PTN demonstrated significantly greater shaping at the 7–10 mm levels, corresponding to the coronal third of the canals (p<0.05). At the 4 mm level, representing the apical curvature, transportation was significantly higher in the PTU group (p=0.006). No statistically significant differences were observed at the other levels (p>0.05). Conclusion: The PTU group, compared to the PTN group, demonstrated more conservative shaping in the coronal and middle thirds, preserving pericervical dentin more effectively. The PTU group may lead to transportation in the apical curvature.

Özet

Amaç: Yapay olarak oluşturulan çift kurvatürlü kanallarda Protaper Next (PTN) ve Protaper Ultimate (PTU) eğe sistemlerinin neden olduğu kanal şekillendirme ve transportasyonu karşılaştırmak. Gereç ve Yöntem: Şeffaf rezin bloklarda otuz adet çift kurvatürlü kanal, PTN ve PTU eğeleri kullanılarak #25 apikal boyuta kadar hazırlandı. Rezin bloklar mürekkeple dolduruldu ve preparasyon öncesi ve sonra fotoğraflanarak görüntüler çakıştırıldı. Kanalların şekillendirme ve transportasyon miktarları değerlendirildi. Student t testi ve Mann Whitney U testi kullanıldı (p<0.05). Bulgular: PTU’ya kıyasla, kanalların koronal üçte birine denk gelen 7-10 mm seviyelerinde kök kanal şekillendirme miktarı, PTN’de önemli ölçüde daha yüksekti (p<0.05). Apikal kurvatüre karşılık gelen 4 mm seviyesinde ise, transportasyon miktarı PTU grubunda PTN’ye kıyasla anlamlı derecede daha fazlaydı (p = 0.006). Diğer mesafelerde kök kanal transportasyon miktarları açısından gruplar arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir fark bulunmadı (p>0.05). Sonuç: PTU grubu, PTN grubuna kıyasla, koronal ve orta üçlüde daha konservatif bir şekillendirme yaparak periservikal dentini daha etkili bir şekilde koruyabilir. PTU grubu apikal üçlüde transportasyona yol açabilir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Biçer, S. P., Uysal, B. A. (2026). Comparison of Canal Shaping and Transportation Between the Protaper Next and Protaper Ultimate in Simulated Double-curved Canals. ADO Klinik Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 15 Sayı: 1, 47–54. https://doi.org/10.54617/adoklinikbilimler.1653383

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (34)

  1. References1. Shakouie S, Mokhtari H, Ghasemi N, Gholizadeh S. Tworooted maxillary first molars with two canals: a case series. Iran Endod J 2013;8:29-32.
  2. References2. Peters OA. Current challenges and concepts in the preparation of root canal systems: a review. J Endod 2004;30:559-67.
  3. References3. Işık V, Ersev H. Farklı Teknolojiler Kullanılarak Üretilmiş Güncel Nikel-Titanyum Esaslı Döner Alet Sistemlerinin Şekillendirme Etkinliklerinin İncelenmesi. Yeditepe J Dent 2024;20:4-11.
  4. References4. Hülsmann M, Peters OA, Dummer PMH. Mechanical preparation of root canals: Shaping goals, techniques, and means. Endod Topics 2005;10:30–76.
  5. References5. Abdellatif D, Iandolo A, Scorziello M, Sangiovanni G, Pisano M. Cyclic fatigue of different Ni-Ti endodontic rotary file alloys: A comprehensive review. Bioengineering (Basel) 2024;11:499.
  6. References6. Brasil SC, Marceliano-Alves MF, Marques ML, Grillo JP, Lacerda MFLS, Alves FRF, et al. Canal Transportation, Unprepared Areas, and Dentin Removal after Preparation with BT-RaCe and ProTaper Next Systems. J Endod 2017;43:1683-7.
  7. References7. Elnaghy AM. Cyclic fatigue resistance of ProTaper Next nickeltitanium rotary files. Int Endod J 2014; 47:1034–9.
  8. References8. Zupanc J, Vahdat-Pajouh N, Schäfer E. New thermomechanically treated NiTi alloy – A review. Int Endod J 2018;51:1088-103.
  9. References9. Ruddle CJ. The ProTaper endodontic system: Geometries, features, and guidelines for use. Dent Today 2001;20:60–7.
  10. References10. Elnaghy AM, Elsaka SE. Assessment of the mechanical properties of ProTaper Next nickel-titanium rotary files. J Endod 2014;40:1830–4.
  11. References11. Martins JNR, Silva EJNL, Marques D, Ajuz N, Rito Pereira M, Pereira da Costa R, et al. Characterization of the file-specific heat-treated ProTaper Ultimate rotary system. Int Endod J 2023;56:530-42.
  12. References12. Mustafa M, Attur K, Bagda KK, Singh S, Oak A, Kathiria N. An Appraisal on Newer Endodontic File Systems: A Narrative Review. J Contemp Dent Pract 2022;23:944-52.
  13. References13. Dentsply Sirona. ProTaper Ultimate Endodontic Files. 2023. Available from https://www.dentsplysirona.com/en-gb/categories/ endodontics/protaper-ultimate-files.html
  14. References14. Unno H, Ebihara A, Hirano K, Kasuga Y, Omori S, Nakatsukasa T, et al. Mechanical Properties and Root Canal Shaping Ability of a Nickel-Titanium Rotary System for Minimally Invasive Endodontic Treatment: A Comparative In Vitro Study. Materials (Basel) 2022;15:7929.
  15. References15. Kim H, Jeon SJ, Seo MS. Comparison of the canal transportation of ProTaper GOLD, WaveOne GOLD, and TruNatomy in simulated double-curved canals. BMC Oral Health 2021;21:533.
  16. References16. Nagaraja S, Sreenivasa Murthy BV. CT evaluation of canal preparation using rotary and hand NI-TI instruments: An in vitro study. J Conserv Dent 2010;13:16-22.
  17. References17. Goldberg F, Araujo JA. Comparison of three instruments in the preparation of curved root canals. Endod Dent Traumatol 1997;13:265-8.
  18. References18. Bueno CRE, Cury MTS, Vasques AMV, Sivieri-Araújo G, Jacinto RC, Gomes-Filho JE, et al. Cyclic fatigue resistance of novel Genius and Edgefile nickel-titanium reciprocating instruments. Braz Oral Res 2019;33:e028.
  19. References19. Gambarini G, Grande NM, Plotino G, Somma F, Garala M, De Luca M, et al. Fatigue resistance of engine-driven rotary nickeltitanium instruments produced by new manufacturing methods. J Endod 2008;34:1003-5.
  20. References20. Bürklein S, Poschmann T, Schäfer E. Shaping ability of different nickel-titanium systems in simulated S-shaped canals with and without glide path. J Endod 2014;40:1231-4.
  21. References21. Bergmans L, Van Cleynenbreugel J, Beullens M, Wevers M, Van Meerbeek B, Lambrechts P. Progressive versus constant tapered shaft design using NiTi rotary instruments. Int Endod J 2003;36:288-95.
  22. References22. Tan BT, Messer HH. The quality of apical canal preparation using hand and rotary instruments with specific criteria for enlargement based on initial apical file size. J Endod 2002;28:658- 64.
  23. References23. Mohammadzadeh Akhlaghi N, Rahimifard N, Moshari A, Vatanpour M, Darmiani S. The Effect of Size and Taper of Apical Preparation in Reducing Intra-Canal Bacteria: A Quantitative SEM Study. Iran Endod J 2014;9:61-5.
  24. References24. López FU, Fachin EV, Camargo Fontanella VR, Barletta FB, Só MV, Grecca FS. Apical transportation: a comparative evaluation of three root canal instrumentation techniques with three different apical diameters. J Endod 2008;34:1545-8.
  25. References25. Shenoi PR, Luniya DA, Badole GP, Makade CS, Kubde R, Khode RT. Comparative evaluation of shaping ability of V-Taper 2H, ProTaper Next, and HyFlex CM in curved canals using conebeam computed tomography: An in vitro Study. Indian J Dent Res 2017;28:181-6.
  26. References26. Wu H, Peng C, Bai Y, Hu X, Wang L, Li C. Shaping ability of ProTaper Universal, WaveOne and ProTaper Next in simulated L-shaped and S-shaped root canals. BMC Oral Health 2015;15:27.
  27. References27. Ribeiro G, Martin V, Rodrigues C, Gomes P. Comparative Evaluation of the Canal Shaping Ability, Pericervical Dentin Preservation, and Smear Layer Removal of TruNatomy, WaveOne Gold, and ProTaper Ultimate-An Ex Vivo Study in Human Teeth. J Endod 2023;49:1733-8.
  28. References28. Diaconu CT, Diaconu AE, Tuculina MJ, Mihai LL, Gheorghiță M, Gheorghiță LM, et al. Assessment of the Cyclic Fatigue Performance of the Novel Protaper Ultimate File System Used in Different Kinematics: An In Vitro Study. J Funct Biomater 2024;15:85.
  29. References29. Riyahi AM, Bashiri A, Alshahrani K, Alshahrani S, Alamri HM, Al-Sudani D. Cyclic Fatigue Comparison of TruNatomy, Twisted File, and ProTaper Next Rotary Systems. Int J Dent 2020;3190938.
  30. References30. Gouédard C, Pino L, Arbab-Chirani R, Arbab-Chirani S, Chevalier V. Comparison of the cyclic fatigue resistance of One Curve, F6 Skytaper, Protaper Next, and Hyflex CM endodontic files. Restor Dent Endod 2022;47:e16.
  31. References31. Rubio J, Zarzosa JI, Aranda S, Casino A, Pallarés A. A comparative study of cyclic fatigue of 6 endodontic systems. An in vitro study. J Clin Exp Dent 2022;14:560-5.
  32. References32. Kunert GG, Camargo Fontanella VR, de Moura AA, Barletta FB. Analysis of apical root transportation associated with ProTaper Universal F3 and F4 instruments by using digital subtraction radiography. J Endod 2010;36:1052-5.
  33. References33.Yang GB, Zhou XD, Zhang H, Wu HK. Shaping ability of progressive versus constant taper instruments in simulated root canals. Int Endod J 2006;39:791-9.
  34. References34. Khalilak Z, Fallahdoost A, Dadresanfar B, Rezvani G. Comparison of extracted teeth and simulated resin blocks on apical canal transportation. Iran Endod J 2008;3:109-12.