Scanning electron microscope evaluation of two methods of resharpening periodontal curets: A comparative study

Ofer Moses, Haim Tal, Zvi Artzi, Alon Sperling, Ron Zohar, Carlos E. Nemcovsky

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


Background: Effective root planing demands sharp cutting edges on dental curets. However, after several strokes, they become dull and must be resharpened frequently. The purpose of this study was to evaluate by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) the quality of the cutting edge of periodontal curets resharpened by 2 different methods. Methods: Forty new detachable Gracey curets were used in this study. After similar blunting, all instruments were resharpened either with 10 strokes using an Arkansas fine-grit sharpening stone (AR), or with 7 strokes using a high-grit and -density aluminum oxide stone (CH). The cutting edges of each instrument were examined using SEM at 1 mm and 2 mm from the tip before and after the resharpening procedure. Bevel measurement and the amount of functional and non-functional wire edges (WE) on the cutting edge were evaluated. Data were statistically analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) with repeated measures, 2-way ANOVA, and Fisher's exact test. Results: After blunting and resharpening, differences in bevel between groups were statistically non-significant. Generally, after resharpening, there were significantly more functional and non-functional WE in the AR group than in the CH group. There were significantly more instruments with a complete absence of WE in the CH group. Conclusions: The CH stone resulted in a smoother and better cutting edge than the AR stone. The procedure was easy to perform and required fewer strokes of the curet on the stone.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1032-1037
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Periodontology
Issue number7
StatePublished - 1 Jul 2003


  • Comparison studies
  • Dental instruments
  • Periodontal diseases/instrumentation


Dive into the research topics of 'Scanning electron microscope evaluation of two methods of resharpening periodontal curets: A comparative study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this