Comparative evaluation of different instrument kinematics on contact percentage, dentin removal and apical debris extrusion in oval canals.
adaptive file
apical debris extrusion
contact percentage
dentin removal
reciprocating file
rotary file
Journal
Australian endodontic journal : the journal of the Australian Society of Endodontology Inc
ISSN: 1747-4477
Titre abrégé: Aust Endod J
Pays: Australia
ID NLM: 100888004
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Sep 2023
Sep 2023
Historique:
revised:
21
03
2023
received:
14
07
2022
accepted:
29
03
2023
medline:
18
9
2023
pubmed:
11
4
2023
entrez:
10
4
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The aim of this study was to compare four different instrument kinematics in oval canals. Distal root of sixty extracted first mandibular molars with single oval canal were allocated randomly to four groups (n = 15) namely protaper universal [PTU] (Rotary), self-adjusting file [SAF] (Adaptive), TruShape [TS] (Rotary) and WaveOne [WO] (Reciprocating). The percentage of untouched and touched surfaces of the root canal was evaluated using micro-computed tomography (MCT). Pre- and post-instrumentation weight was assessed using digital microbalance for determining the amount of dentin removed and apical extrusion of debris. The results were tabulated, and their mean difference was statistically analysed using one-way ANOVA and Tukey's HSD test. PTU and SAF exhibited significantly less mean percentage of untouched surface compared to TS. TS files removed less dentin and extruded less debris in long oval canals.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
413-418Informations de copyright
© 2023 Australian Society of Endodontology Inc.
Références
Paqué F, Balmer M, Attin T, Peters OA. Preparation of oval-shaped root canals in mandibular molars using nickel-titanium rotary instruments: a micro-computed tomography study. J Endod. 2010;36(4):703-7.
Taha NA, Ozawa T, Messer HH. Comparison of three techniques for preparing oval-shaped root canals. J Endod. 2010;36(3):532-5.
European Society of Endodontology. Quality guidelines for endodontic treatment: consensus report of the European Society of Endodontology. Int Endod J. 2006;39(12):921-30.
ElAyouti A, Chu AL, Kimionis I, Klein C, Weiger R, Löst C. Efficacy of rotary instruments with greater taper in preparing oval root canals. Int Endod J. 2008;41(12):1088-92.
Wu MK, R'oris A, Barkis D, Wesselink PR. Prevalence and extent of long oval canals in the apical third. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2000;89(6):739-43.
Madani ZS, Mehraban N, Moudi E, Bijani A. Root and canal morphology of mandibular molars in a selected Iranian population using cone-beam computed tomography. Iran Endod J. 2017;12(2):143-8.
Gutmann J, Fan B. Tooth morphology, isolation, and access. In: Hargreaves KM, Berman LH, Rotstein I, editors. Cohen's pathways of the pulp. Eleventh ed. St. Louis, Missouri: Elsevier; 2016. p. 130-208.
Alves FRF, Rôças IN, Almeida BM, Neves MAS, Zoffoli J, Siqueira JF. Quantitative molecular and culture analyses of bacterial elimination in oval-shaped root canals by a single-file instrumentation technique: root canal disinfection. Int Endod J. 2012;45(9):871-7.
Himabindu R, Bhuvan S, Shekar K, Sindhura R, Shantipriya P. Comparision of cleaning efficiency of rotary Protaper and self adjusting file in oval shaped canals - an In- vitro study. J Med Sci Clin Res. 2017;5(10):29341-6.
Topcu KM, Karatas E, Ozsu D, Ersoy I. Efficiency of the self adjusting file, WaveOne, Reciproc, ProTaper and hand files in root canal debridement. Eur J Dent. 2014;08(3):326-9.
Jou YT, Karabucak B, Levin J, Liu D. Endodontic working width: current concepts and techniques. Dent Clin N Am. 2004;48(1):323-35.
Marroquin B, Elsayed M, Willershausenzonnchen B. Morphology of the physiological foramen: I. Maxillary and Mandibular Molars J Endod. 2004;30(5):321-8.
Mohammadi Z, Shalavi S, Jafarzadeh H. The oval shaped root canal: a clinical review. SADJ. 2015;70(5):200-4.
Kirchhoff AL, Fariniuk LF, Mello I. Apical extrusion of debris in flat-oval root canals after using different instrumentation systems. J Endod. 2015;41(2):237-41.
Yang G, Yuan G, Yun X, Zhou X, Liu B, Wu H. Effects of two nickel-titanium instrument systems, Mtwo versus ProTaper universal, on root canal geometry assessed by micro-computed tomography. J Endod. 2011;37(10):1412-6.
Bortoluzzi EA, Carlon D, Meghil MM, El-Awady AR, Niu L, Bergeron BE, et al. Efficacy of 3D conforming nickel titanium rotary instruments in eliminating canal wall bacteria from oval-shaped root canals. J Dent. 2015;43(5):597-604.
de Melo Ribeiro MV, Silva-Sousa YT, Versiani MA, Lamira A, Steier L, Pécora JD, et al. Comparison of the cleaning efficacy of self-adjusting file and rotary Systems in the Apical Third of oval-shaped canals. J Endod. 2013;39(3):398-401.
Hadi AW, Hameed MR. Comparative study of the amount of apically extrusion of debris during root canal preparation using wave one™, Trushape 3D™, Hyflex™ CM and one shape™ instrumentation systems : an in vitro study. J Baghdad Coll Dent. 2017;29(1):1-8.
Lim SS, Stock CJR. The risk of perforation in the curved canal: anticurvature filing compared with the stepback technique. Int Endod J. 1987;20(1):33-9.
Fayyad DM, Elhakim Elgendy AA. Cutting efficiency of twisted versus machined nickel-titanium endodontic files. J Endod. 2011;37(8):1143-6.
Perez Morales M de las N, González Sánchez JA, Olivieri Fernández JG, Laperre K, Abella Sans F, Jaramillo DE, et al. TRUShape versus XP-endo shaper: a micro-computed tomographic assessment and comparative study of the shaping ability-an In vitro study. J Endod. 2020;46(2):271-6.
Bakir D, Al-Huwaizi H, Salman R. Micro CT analysis of amount of dentin removal created by SAF vs. ProTaper Systems Bagh Coll Dentistry. 2014;26(3):9-12.
Myers GL, Montgomery S. A comparison of weights of debris extruded apically by conventional filing and canal master techniques. J Endod. 1991;17(6):275-9.
Roshdy NN, Hassan R. Quantitative evaluation of apically extruded debris using TRUShape, TruNatomy, and WaveOne gold in curved canals. BDJ Open. 2022;8(1):13.
De-Deus GA. Nogueira Leal Silva EJ, Moreira EJ, de Almeida Neves a, belladonna FG, Tameirão M. assessment of apically extruded debris produced by the self-adjusting file system. J Endod. 2014;40(4):526-9.
Ozsu D, Karatas E, Arslan H, Topcu MC. Quantitative evaluation of apically extruded debris during root canal instrumentation with ProTaper universal, ProTaper next, WaveOne, and self-adjusting file systems. Eur J Dent. 2014;08(4):504-8.
Yılmaz F, Eren İ, Eren H, Badi MA, Ocak M, Çelik HH. Evaluation of the amount of root canal dentin removed and apical transportation occurrence after instrumentation with ProTaper next, OneShape, and EdgeFile rotary systems. J Endod. 2020;46(5):662-7.
Lacerda MFLS, Marceliano-Alves MF, Pérez AR, Provenzano JC, Neves MAS, Pires FR, et al. Cleaning and shaping oval canals with 3 instrumentation systems: a correlative micro-computed tomographic and histologic study. J Endod. 2017;43(11):1878-84.