Date of Graduation
2024
Document Type
Thesis
Degree Type
MS
College
School of Dentistry
Department
Dental Practice & Rural Health
Committee Chair
Samuel Dorn
Committee Co-Chair
R. Constance Wiener
Committee Member
R. Constance Wiener
Committee Member
Steven B. Whitaker
Abstract
Introduction: The production of gutta percha points as root canal therapy filling materials vary from hand processing to machine processing with a range of acceptable levels of error (tolerance). Similarly, endodontic files manufactured to complement corresponding gutta percha points exhibit specified levels of tolerance. Investigations into the consistency among manufacturers of files and gutta percha points is limited. The aim of this study is to see how variability in apical gauge and taper of gutta percha points affected the clinical performance during cone try in. The null hypothesis of this study is that there is no difference in two gutta percha brands’ abilities to reach the working length after instrumentation and fill. The alternative hypothesis is that variability in the manufacturing process leads to gutta percha points failing to be within an acceptable range of working length at cone try in.
Materials and Methods. Gutta percha points selected for this study included Vortex Blue ® (VB) Conform Fit TM Gutta Percha, and EdgeFile® (EE) X7.06 Bioceramic Gutta Percha points. It is desirable for gutta percha points to fit as closely to the obturated shape of a root canal thus allowing the gutta percha and sealer to create the most hermetic seal possible at both ends of the canal system. This seal is pertinent to the overall success of root canal therapy. Ten extracted human maxillary canine teeth and
ten maxillary lateral incisor teeth were instrumented using VB files. The same method was also utilized with EE files (n=40 teeth). Vortex Blue and EE gutta percha points were tried in each instrumented tooth. Radiographic analysis was performed to evaluate fit (the amount of difference from the master apical file terminated in each canal compared to the master apical points terminated in each canal). The acceptable tolerance was - 0.5 mm (0.5 mm short) to 0 mm of the instrumented length.
Results: There was no significant difference in the average acceptable tolerance of each group tested.
Conclusions: There was no statistical difference amongst brands or combinations of brands in regard to outcomes. The null hypothesis is thereby accepted. As a clinical consideration, although it is practical to use the same brand of file and gutta percha point, a clinician can effectively use a similarly sized gutta percha point from either of these two brands.
Recommended Citation
Pancake, Alex R., "Clinical Significance of Gutta Percha Variability" (2024). Graduate Theses, Dissertations, and Problem Reports. 12519.
https://researchrepository.wvu.edu/etd/12519