Evaluation of the Effect of Different Root Canal Preparation Techniques in Primary Teeth Using CBCT

2018 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 250-255 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shahid M Shaikh ◽  
Mousumi Goswami
Keyword(s):  
Root Canal ◽  
Primary Teeth ◽  
File System ◽  
Second Primary ◽  
Preparation Technique ◽  
Root Canal Preparation ◽  
India Ink ◽  
Group I ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Canal Transportation

Objectives: The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare and evaluate the cleaning and shaping efficiency of the rotary Ni-Ti, sonic and conventional file systems for root canal preparation in primary teeth under CBCT. Study Design: Seventy five maxillary and mandibular first and second primary molars were divided into three groups of 25 teeth each, according to the canal preparation technique: Group I Rotary file system, Group II Sonic file system, Group III Conventional K files. Canals were scanned using an i-CAT CBCT scanner before and after preparation to evaluate their shaping efficiency. Root canal transportation and centering ratio were evaluated at coronal, middle and apical thirds. The cleaning efficiency was evaluated by the extent of India ink removal from the canal walls under stereomicroscope. The collected data was subjected to statistical analysis. Results: Nickel–Titanium (Ni-Ti) rotary system caused less canal transportation and had better centering ability. Sonic system showed better shaping at the apex, and wider at coronal end. Conventional K-files removed more dentin at coronal than in middle and apex and efficiently cleaned the root canals. There were no significant difference in cleaning and shaping efficiency between Rotary system, Sonic system & Conventional K file system. Conclusion: Rotary instrumentations could be considered as an efficient alternative to conventional hand preparation as it respects the original canal anatomy with no aberrations or resulting failures.

scholarly journals Comparative Evaluation of The Efficacy Of Rotary file system (Kedo-S) Vs Hand K-Files In Root Canal Preparation Of Primary Teeth Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) - An In Vitro Study

2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 197-202
Author(s):  
Abhinaya Srinivas ◽  
LGanesh Jeevanandan ◽  
Lavanya Govindaraju ◽  
Erulappan Muthu Ganapathi Subramanian
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Cone Beam Computed Tomography ◽  
Primary Teeth ◽  
File System ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Cone Beam ◽  
Root Canal Preparation ◽  
Group I ◽  
Shaping Ability

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of rotary Kedo-S and hand K-files in shaping ability in primary canines using cone beam computed tomography. Materials and Methods: Thirty extracted primary maxillary and mandibular canines were selected. Using cone beam computed tomography the teeth were scanned before instrumentation. In Group I, the teeth were prepared using stainless steel K file up to the size of 40. In the Group II teeth, U1 size Kedo-S rotary file was used in crown down technique. The instrumented teeth were scanned again with cone beam computed tomography and the images were compared. Results: The canal taper was more conical for rotary Kedo-S files as compared to K-files, which was statistically significant. Conclusion:  Canal preparation with Rotary files resulted in more conical canals when compared to manual instrumentation in primary teeth that contributes to more uniform obturation.KeywordsCBCT; Hand K-files; Kedo-S file system; Primary teeth; Pulpectomy; Rotary instrumentation.

scholarly journals Comparison of Canal Transportation and Centering Ability of ProGlider and WaveOne Gold Glider in Curved Canals

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (04) ◽  
pp. 639-643
Author(s):  
Gabriela Behne Miró ◽  
Flávia Sens Fagundes Tomazinho ◽  
Edson Pelisser ◽  
Mariana Maciel Batista Borges ◽  
Marco Antônio Hungaro Duarte ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Root Canal ◽  
File Systems ◽  
Root Canal Preparation ◽  
Volume Increase ◽  
Volume Variation ◽  
Glide Path ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Canal Transportation ◽  
Level Of Significance

Abstract Objectives The aim of this study was to compare the volume variation and maintenance of the root canal position when using the ProGlider 16.02 (PG) and the WaveOne Gold Glider 15.02 (WOGG) file systems for glide path preparation. Materials and Methods Twenty-four moderately curved mesiobuccal canals of maxil-lary first molars were selected and randomly divided into two groups: PG and WOGG. The selected teeth were scanned using microtomography before and after root canal preparation to assess centralization and linear transport at 1, 3, 5, and 7 mm from the apical foramen. Statistical Analysis The data were analyzed with the Mann–Whitney U test. The level of significance was 5%. Results There were no significant differences in volume variation or root canal transport (p > 0.05). There was a significant difference in the centralization of the root canal at 3 mm from the foramen (p < 0.05). Conclusions WOGG and PG instruments presented similar results regarding the root canal volume increase and transport. WOGG caused higher decentralization at 3 mm from the apical foramen.

scholarly journals Apical Transportation of Mesiobuccal Canals of Maxillary Molars Following Root Canal Preparation with Two Rotary Systems and Hand Files: A Cone-Beam Computed Tomographic Assessment

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pegah Sarraf ◽  
Nazanin Kiomarsi ◽  
Farrokh Haj Taheri ◽  
Behrang Moghaddamzade ◽  
Fatemeh Dibaji ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Root Canal ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Cone Beam ◽  
Root Canal Preparation ◽  
Computed Tomographic ◽  
Maxillary Molars ◽  
Apical Transportation ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Canal Transportation

Objectives: This study aimed to compare the transportation of the mesiobuccal canal of maxillary molars following root canal preparation with HyFlex CM (HCM) and Edge Taper Platinum (ETP) rotary systems and stainless steel (SS) hand files using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Materials and Methods: This in-vitro study was performed on 48 maxillary molars in three groups of 16. The teeth were mounted in acrylic blocks, and root canals were prepared using HCM in group 1 (up to #30/0.06), ETP in group 2 (up to F3/0.06), and SS hand files in group 3 (up to #30). CBCT scans were taken before and after root canal preparation. The amount of canal transportation was measured at 0, 3, 6, and 9mm from the apex. Data were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests. Results: The difference in canal transportation at 0 and 6mm from the apex was significant between the HCM and ETP groups (P=0.031 and 0.023) but none of the systems showed any significant difference with hand files at 0- and 6-mm levels (P=0.10, 0.56, 0.22, and 0.50), respectively. At 3mm from the apex, no significant difference was noted among the groups (P=0.30). At the 9-mm level, the amount of canal transportation was not significantly different between HCM and ETP (P=0.83) but they showed significant differences with hand files (P<0.001). Conclusion: ETP and HCM caused less canal transportation at the curvature of the mesiobuccal canal of maxillary molars compared to hand files. ETP showed superior efficacy in root canal preparation compared to HCM.

scholarly journals Evaluation of apical debris extrusion during root canal preparation using Hand K file, Revo S, Protaper Next and Wave One file system: An in vitro study.

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 16-21
Author(s):  
Mohd Salman Akhtar ◽  
Ankit Agarwal ◽  
Mohammed Ayaz Malick ◽  
Sheeba Khan ◽  
Sachin Yadav ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Root Canal ◽  
File System ◽  
Root Canal Preparation ◽  
Group 4 ◽  
Apical Extrusion ◽  
Intergroup Comparison ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Final Weight ◽  
Group 3 ◽  
Group 2

Introduction: The key step during the root canal treatment is the biomechanical preparation of the infected root canals. This preparation may result in pushing the apical debris through the apical foramen into the periapical space leading to initiation of immunological response by the host leading to postoperative pain and discomfort. Therefore the aim of the study was to compare the apical debris extrusion during root canal preparation using Hand k file, Revo S, Protaper Next and Wave One file system.    Materials and Method: Sixty extracted human mandibular premolars with single canal were selected and randomly divided into four groups (n = 15) for instrumentation with four different files. Group 1: Hand k file, Group 2: Revo S file, Group 3: ProTaper Next, and Group 4: WaveOne single reciprocating file. Debris extruding during instrumentation were collected into pre-weighed Eppendorf tubes. These tubes were then stored in an incubator at 70°C for 5 days and were then weighed to obtain the final weight, with the extruded debris. Weight of extruded debris was calculated by subtracting the initial weight from the final weight. Statistical analysis was performed using one-way analysis of variance and post hoc Tukey’s test. Result: For intergroup comparison, significant differences were found for the debris extruded. Instrumentation with hand K files resulted in significantly more debris extrusion apically as compared to other three NiTi groups. Maximum debris extrusion was seen by Hand K file, followed by group 2(Revo S), then group 4(Wave One) and least by group 3(Protaper Next). However, there was no significant difference in debris extrusion amongst groups prepared with either NiTi rotary or reciprocating file systems. Conclusion: The Pro Taper Next resulted in least debris extrusion when compared to Hand k file, reciprocating Wave One and rotary Revo S. However there was not a significant difference between all the NiTi rotary and reciprocating file system. Keywords: Apical extrusion debris; Hand k file, instrumentation; ProTaper Next, RevoS and WaveOne.

scholarly journals Cone-beam Computed Tomographic Analysis of Canal Transportation and Centering Ability of Three Different Nickel-Titanium Rotary File Systems

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (D) ◽  
pp. 30-36
Author(s):  
Balaji Sopanrao Kapse ◽  
Pradnya S. Nagmode ◽  
Jayshree Ramkrishna Vishwas ◽  
Hrishikesh B. Karpe ◽  
Harshal V. Basatwar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Root Canal ◽  
File System ◽  
File Systems ◽  
Nickel Titanium ◽  
Root Canals ◽  
Apical Transportation ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Canal Transportation ◽  
Curved Root Canals

AIM: The aim of the present study was to compare the canal transportation and centering ability of three rotary nickel-titanium file systems, HyFlex controlled memory, Revo-S, and Mtwo in moderately curved root canals using computed tomography (CT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty freshly extracted single-rooted teeth having curved root canals with at least 10°–20° of curvature were selected. The teeth were divided into three experimental groups of ten each. After preparation with HyFlex CM (Coltene-Whaledent, Allstetten, Switzerland), Revo-S (Micro-Mega, Besançon, France), and Mtwo (VDW, Munich, Germany) all teeth were scanned using CT to determine the root canal shape. Pre- and post-instrumentation images were obtained at three levels, 3 mm apical, 9 mm middle, and 15 mm coronal above the apical foramen were compared using CT software. Amount of transportation and centering ability were assessed. The three groups were statistically compared with analysis of variance and post-hoc Tukey’s honestly significant difference test. RESULTS: Least apical transportation and higher centering ability were seen in HyFlex CM file system in all the three sections followed by Revo-S, Mtwo file system showed maximum transportation. CONCLUSIONS: According to the present in-vitro study, we can conclude that HyFlex CM rotary file systems showed least canal transportation and highest centering ability as compared to Revo-S and Mtwo file system but there was no statistically significant difference among these file systems (p > 0.05) at coronal, middle, and apical level of root canal.

scholarly journals Evaluation of dentinal micro-cracks caused by the Protaper Universal, Protaper Next and Reciproc rotary file systems used in root canal preparation

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 111-116
Author(s):  
Meltem Deveci Taç ◽  
Sadullah Kaya ◽  
Seda Falakaloğlu
Keyword(s):  
Root Canal ◽  
Crack Formation ◽  
File System ◽  
File Systems ◽  
Root Canal Preparation ◽  
Root Fracture ◽  
Vertical Root Fracture ◽  
Anterior Teeth ◽  
Micro Cracks ◽  
Significant Difference

Objective: In this study, we compared the occurrence of dentinal micro-cracks after use of the ProTaper Universal (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland), ProTaper Next (Dentsply Maillefer), and Reciproc (VDW, Munich, Germany) nickel–titanium rotary file systems in root canal preparation. Method: One hundred mandibular anterior teeth were divided into five groups of 20 specimens each. Group 1 served as a control, with no intervention. In group 2, preparation was performed using the step-back technique and K files. In groups 3–5, root canal preparation was performed using the ProTaper Universal, ProTaper Next, and Reciproc file systems, respectively. Following preparation, specimens were sectioned at 3, 6, and 9 mm using a Minitom precision cut-off machine. The sections were evaluated under a stereomicroscope. The following scoring system was used to rate specimens: 1, no micro-crack; 2, incomplete micro-crack; and 3, vertical root fracture. The results were statistically assessed (p ≤ 0.05). Results: No micro-crack formation was observed in groups 1 and 2. The highest rate of micro-crack formation was observed in specimens prepared with the ProTaper Universal file system (20%), followed by those prepared with the Reciproc (11.7%) and ProTaper Next (6.7%) file systems. However, no significant difference was detected among groups (p > 0.05). In the groups ProTaper Universal and Reciproc files were used, 1 vertical root fracture was found in 9 mm sections for each. Conclusion: Considering the limitations of in vitro studies, we can conclude that all rotary file systems used in this study led to dentinal micro-crack formation in roots. The ProTaper Universal file system caused more dentinal micro-cracking than did the ProTaper Next and Reciproc file systems.

scholarly journals Apical Transportation of Mesiobuccal Canals of Maxillary Molars Following Root Canal Preparation with Two Rotary Systems and Hand Files: A Cone-Beam Computed Tomographic Assessment

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pegah Sarraf ◽  
Nazanin Kiomarsi ◽  
Farrokh Haj Taheri ◽  
Behrang Moghaddamzade ◽  
Fatemeh Dibaji ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Root Canal ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Cone Beam ◽  
Root Canal Preparation ◽  
Computed Tomographic ◽  
Maxillary Molars ◽  
Apical Transportation ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Canal Transportation

Objectives: This study aimed to compare the transportation of the mesiobuccal canal of maxillary molars following root canal preparation with HyFlex CM (HCM) and Edge Taper Platinum (ETP) rotary systems and stainless steel (SS) hand files using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Materials and Methods: This in-vitro study was performed on 48 maxillary molars in three groups of 16. The teeth were mounted in acrylic blocks, and root canals were prepared using HCM in group 1 (up to #30/0.06), ETP in group 2 (up to F3/0.06), and SS hand files in group 3 (up to #30). CBCT scans were taken before and after root canal preparation. The amount of canal transportation was measured at 0, 3, 6, and 9mm from the apex. Data were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests. Results: The difference in canal transportation at 0 and 6mm from the apex was significant between the HCM and ETP groups (P=0.031 and 0.023) but none of the systems showed any significant difference with hand files at 0- and 6-mm levels (P=0.10, 0.56, 0.22, and 0.50), respectively. At 3mm from the apex, no significant difference was noted among the groups (P=0.30). At the 9-mm level, the amount of canal transportation was not significantly different between HCM and ETP (P=0.83) but they showed significant differences with hand files (P<0.001). Conclusion: ETP and HCM caused less canal transportation at the curvature of the mesiobuccal canal of maxillary molars compared to hand files. ETP showed superior efficacy in root canal preparation compared to HCM.

scholarly journals Kedo file system for root canal preparation in primary teeth

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 622
Author(s):  
Ganesh Jeevanandan ◽  
Sagareeka Ganesh ◽  
Arthilakshmi
Keyword(s):  
Root Canal ◽  
Primary Teeth ◽  
File System ◽  
Root Canal Preparation

An in Vivo Comparison of Antimicrobial Efficacy of Sodium Hypochlorite and Biopure MTAD™ against Enterococcus Faecalis in Primary Teeth: A qPCR Study

2014 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 30-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
SG Tulsani ◽  
N Chikkanarasaiah ◽  
S Bethur
Keyword(s):  
Root Canal ◽  
Primary Teeth ◽  
Antimicrobial Efficacy ◽  
Permanent Teeth ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Statistical Significant Difference ◽  
Anterior Teeth ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Root Canal Irrigant

Objectives: Biopure MTAD™, a new root canal irrigant has shown promising results against the most common resistant microorganism, E. faecalis, in permanent teeth. However, there is lack of studies comparing its antimicrobial effectiveness with NaOCl in primary teeth. The purpose of this study was to compare the in vivo antimicrobial efficacy of NaOCl 2.5% and Biopure MTAD™ against E. faecalis in primary teeth. Study design: Forty non vital single rooted primary maxillary anterior teeth of children aged 4-8 years, were irrigated either with NaOCl 2.5% (n=15), Biopure MTAD™ (n=15) and 0.9% Saline (n=10, control group). Paper point samples were collected at baseline (S1) and after chemomechanical preparation (S2) during the pulpectomy procedure. The presence of E. faecalis in S1 & S2 was evaluated using Real time Polymerase Chain Reaction. Results: Statistical significant difference was found in the antimicrobial efficacy of NaOCl 2.5 % and BioPure MTAD™ when compared to saline (p&gt;0.05). However, no statistical significant difference was found between the efficacies of both the irrigants. Conclusions: NaOCl 2.5% and BioPure MTAD™, both irrigants are equally efficient against E. faecalis in necrotic primary anterior teeth. MTAD is a promising irrigant, however clinical studies are required to establish it as ideal root canal irrigant in clinical practice.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document