impact of traditional vs. conservative endodontic access cavity on shaping ability of reciprocating and continuous rotation file systems using cone beam computed tomography (cbct)

Purpose: this in-vitro study was conducted to illustrate the influence of traditional endodontic access cavity (teac) and conservative endodontic access cavity (ceac) procedures on the capacity of af f one (fanta dental materials co., shanghai, china) and af blue r3 (fanta dental materials co., shanghai, china), a continuous rotation and reciprocation endodontic rotary file systems respectively, to shape the root canals of maxillary premolar teeth without transportation or centering deviation.materials and methods: randomly, forty maxillary premolar teeth were categorized into four groups. group 1 was accessed and instrumented conventionally with af f one, group 2 was accessed and instrumented conventionally with af blue r3, group 3 was accessed and instrumented conservatively with af f one, and group 4 was accessed and instrumented conservatively with af blue r3. with the use of cone-beam computed tomography (cbct) imaging (planmeca promax, helsinki, ‎finland), before and after instrumentation pictures of the root canals were captured for the purpose of calculating the transportation and centering ability.results: after checking the normality of data distribution, which was accomplished using the shapiro-wilk test, an independent sample t-test was performed to compare the data of various groups with a 95% level of confidence. equivalent in terms of transportation and centering capacity, the two distinct endodontic instruments have comparable shaping capacities. no statistically significant difference (p > 0.05) was seen among the endodontic access cavity approaches for the two file systems investigated.conclusion: compared to teac preparation, ceac preparation has no effect on the capacity of the endodontic files to shape the root canal system.