The efficiency of using the manual instrumentation versus the sonic or

ultrasonic one for preparing the endodontic space

Aim : The aim of this study was to reveal the quality of the wall dentin ,after
the action of various instruments by micro-electron scanning the slice surface.

Material and methods : To achieve the present study , 35 complete human

teeth were used ,extracted for orthodontic reason ,which were grouped at
random in 5 groups of 7 teeth, instrumented as follows : gr.1 –manual
instrumentation ( Kerr-file ,Spofa Dental Cehia ); gr.2 –sonic instrumentation (
Sonic Air 1500 Endo Sistem, Micromega-France, using shaper-sonic-file ); gr.3 –
U.S.instrumentation (Suprasson P5 Booster,Satelec-Germany,using sono-file );
gr.4 –combined instrumentation : manual/US ; gr.5 : manual/sonic. After the
instrumentation, the teeth were cross-sectioned and prepared in view of
analyzing the MEB sections.

Results and discussion: The results revealed significant differences (ANOVA test
: p ‹ 0,001 )between the sonic and US methods. According to most authors our
results proved that the US instrumentation has higher effect on cleansing
,achieving smooth surface covered by slight smear-layer. The sonic
instrumentation had in close results, while the manual cleansing resulted in
walls with more roughness and dentin debris. The best results were obtained
by combining the manual method with the sonic or US one.

Conclusion : The manual method proved to be basic in the complete

preparation of the canal space ,but a higher performance is obtained by
combining it with the sonic and US methods, which diminish the work time. The
canals irrigation was used in all these cases.