scholarly journals Apically extruded debris associated with ProTaper Next, ProTaper Gold and TruNatomy systems: An in vitro study

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 30-34
Author(s):  
Neslihan Yılmaz Çırakoglu ◽  
Yağız Özbay
Keyword(s):  
Root Canal ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
The Other ◽  
Root Canal Preparation ◽  
Root Canals ◽  
System P ◽  
Apical Extrusion ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Final Weight

Background. This research aimed to investigate and compare the amount of apically extruded debris after root canal preparation using ProTaper Next, ProTaper Gold, and TruNatomy systems. Methods. Forty-five extracted mandibular premolar teeth with single canals with similar lengths were used. The root canals were prepared using ProTaper Next (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland), ProTaper Gold (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland), or TruNatomy (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland) files. Apically extruded debris during preparation was gathered into preweighed Eppendorf tubes. Then the Eppendorf tubes were incubated at 70°C for five days. The Eppendorf tubes were weighed again to determine their final weight plus the extruded debris. Results. The TRN system resulted in significantly less debris extrusion than the PTN system (P<0.05). There was no significant difference between the PTN and PTG groups and between the PTG and TRN groups (P>0.05). Conclusion. All the instrumentation systems caused apical extrusion of debris. However, the TRN system resulted in significantly less debris extrusion than the other systems.

scholarly journals Apical Debris Extrusion during Root Canal Preparation with ProTaper Next and Mani Silk Rotary Systems: An in vitro Study

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 66-69
Author(s):  
Madhusudhana Koppolu ◽  
Chinni Suneelkumar ◽  
Anumula Lavanya ◽  
Ram Basam
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Root Canal ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Root Canal Preparation ◽  
Initial Weight ◽  
Root Canals ◽  
The Social ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Final Weight

ABSTRACT Aim To evaluate the amount of apically extruded debris after the preparation of root canals in extracted human single-rooted teeth using ProTaper Next and Mani Silk rotary systems. Materials and methods A total of 40 freshly extracted human single-rooted teeth with mature apices and straight root canal were selected and similar length were instrumented with ProTaper Next and Mani Silk rotary systems. Debris and irrigant extruded during instrumentation were collected into preweighed Eppendorf tubes. The Eppendorf tubes were then stored in an incubator at 68°C for 5 days. The weight of the extruded debris was determined by subtracting the initial weight from the final weight. Statistical analysis Data analysis was carried out using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 20. Postweights were compared with an independent t test for 2 groups. Results Both instruments were associated with apical debris extrusion. There was no significant difference between the ProTaper Next and Mani Silk instruments in terms of mean weight of apically extruded debris. Conclusion There was no significant difference among the groups in terms of mean weight of apically extruded debris. How to cite this article Koppolu M, Basam R, Suneelkumar C, Lavanya A. Apical Debris Extrusion during Root Canal Preparation with ProTaper Next and Mani Silk Rotary Systems: An in vitro Study. J Oper Dent Endod 2016;1(2):66-69.

Force and vibration analysis in biomechanical preparation of root canals using reciprocating endodontic file system: In vitro study

2021 ◽  
pp. 095441192110442
Author(s):  
Vinod Singh Thakur ◽  
Pavan Kumar Kankar ◽  
Anand Parey ◽  
Arpit Jain ◽  
Prashant Kumar Jain
Keyword(s):  
Root Canal ◽  
Vibration Analysis ◽  
File System ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Root Canal Preparation ◽  
Root Canals ◽  
Improper Use ◽  
Four Levels ◽  
Root Canal Instrumentation

The shaping and cleaning of the root canal are very important in root canal treatment. The excessive force and vibration during biomechanical preparation of the root canal may result in failure of the endodontic file. In this study, force and vibration analysis was carried out during root canal preparation. The samples of human extracted (premolar) teeth were provided by the College of Dental Science and Hospital. Endodontic instruments for reciprocating motion, such as the WaveOne Gold file system, had been used for root canal preparation. Force and vibration signals were recorded by dynamometer and accelerometer, respectively. The acquired signals were denoised using the db4 (SWT denoising 1-D) wavelet. Four levels of decomposition were carried out for each signal. The signal denoising technique was used to remove unwanted noise from the acquired signal. FESEM analysis was used to visualize the levels of severity of endodontic files during the cleaning and shaping of the root canal. In most of the cases, the failure occurred due to the improper use of the root canal instrumentation. The optimum amount of force was used to avoid the file failure and provided the proper instrumentation. The curve fitting regression model was used to find the interdependency between force and vibration.

scholarly journals Effectiveness of hand and Mtwo™ instruments in preparing oval-shaped root canals: in vitro study

2016 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Fernanda Diederichs Coutinho ◽  
Renata Dornelles Morgental ◽  
Simone Bonato Luisi ◽  
Fabiana Vieira Vier-Pelisser ◽  
Patricia Maria Poli Kopper
Keyword(s):  
Root Canal ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Root Apex ◽  
Conventional Technique ◽  
Basic Sequence ◽  
Preparation Technique ◽  
Root Canals ◽  
Canal Area ◽  
Significant Difference

Objective: This study evaluated through stereomicroscopy the effectiveness of hand and rotary instrumentation techniques, either isolated or combined, in the preparation of oval-shaped root canals. Materials and method: Thirty single-rooted human mandibular incisors were selected. After endodontic access and coronal preflaring, teeth were mounted in a modified Bramante muffle and then sectioned transversely at 3 and 6 mm from the root apex. Images of each section were made under a stereomicroscope at 30× magnification. Teeth were reassembled in the muffle and divided into three groups (n=10) according to the root canal preparation technique: GI - rotary preparation with Mtwo™ basic sequence (10/.04; 15/.05; 20/.06; 25/.06), followed by Mtwo™ complementary instruments (30/.05; 35/.04; 40/.04); GII - rotary preparation with Mtwo™ basic sequence, complemented by hand instruments (#30, #35 and #40); GIII - hand instrumentation using the conventional technique (#10 to #40). All instruments were used in brushing motion. The muffles were separated again so that new images of each section could be obtained. The following parameters were evaluated in pre- and postoperative images: root canal area; perimeter; mesiodistal (MD) and buccolingual (BL) diameters; and mesial (M) and distal (D) wall thickness. Next, the values measured in post- and preoperative images were subtracted forcomparison of experimental groups. Data were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis test (α=0.05). Results: No significant difference between groups was observed for all parameters. Conclusion: There was no difference among hand, rotary, or combined instrumentation; all techniques were able to increase root canal area, perimeter, and diameter in MD and BL directions. Moreover, the amount of dentin wearon proximal root canal walls was similar for all tested groups.

scholarly journals Comparative Evaluation of Apical Extrusion of Debris During Root Canal Preparation Using two Rotary Systems - An In vitro Study

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (12) ◽  
pp. 139-143
Author(s):  
Hanumanthu Kumari ◽  
S Datta Prasad ◽  
C Sunil kumar ◽  
N Vamsee Krishna ◽  
S Sunil kumar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Root Canal ◽  
Comparative Evaluation ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Vitro Study ◽  
Root Canal Preparation ◽  
Apical Extrusion

scholarly journals COMPARISON OF THE AMOUNT OF APICAL EXTRUSION OF BACTERIA FOLLOWING THE USE OF DIFFERENT INSTRUMENTATION TECHNIQUES – AN IN VITRO STUDY

2011 ◽  
Vol 01 (04) ◽  
pp. 27-32
Author(s):  
Mithra N. Hegde ◽  
Snehal Thatte
Keyword(s):  
Culture Media ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Group Iii ◽  
Root Canals ◽  
Apical Extrusion ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group Ii ◽  
Group 1

Abstract Objectives: The objective of this study is to compare the amount of extrusion of bacteria beyond the apical foramen after instrumentation with Crown down and Step-back techniques using a manual and engine driven nickel-titanium instruments Materials and Methods: Seventy-five mandibular premolars with similar dimensions were used for the study. Access cavities prepared and root canals contaminated with a suspension of Enterococcus faecalis. The contaminated teeth were then divided into three experimental groups. Group 1(Crowndown group) divided into two: Group 1–A Hand files: root canals were instrumented using K-files and Group 1B – Rotary files: root canals were instrumented using ProTaper instruments. Group II (Step-back group) divided into two: Group II A– Hand files: root canals were instrumented using K-files and group II B–Rotary files: the root canals were instrumented using Light Speed LSX instruments. Group III (control group): no instrumentation was done.Bacteria were extruded after preparation were collected into vials, microbiological samples were incubated in culture media for 24hrs. The CFUs were determined for each sample. The data obtained was analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis one way analysis of variance and Mann-Whitney U-tests. Result: There was a significant difference in the amount of bacteria extruded by both Crowndown and Step-back. The Step- back hand method extruded significantly more bacteria when compared with Crowndown hand technique. Conclusion: All instrumentation techniques extruded intracanal bacteria apically. There was a significant difference in both the engine driven instrumentation techniques, while the hand instrumentation by Step-back extruded more bacteria.

scholarly journals In vitro study of effect of solvent on root canal retreatment

2002 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 208-211 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kazumi Onaga Nagayama Oyama ◽  
Evandro Luiz Siqueira ◽  
Marcelo dos Santos
Keyword(s):  
In Vitro Study ◽  
The Other ◽  
Orange Oil ◽  
Root Canals ◽  
Effect Of Solvent ◽  
Gutta Percha ◽  
Root Canal Retreatment ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Made In

The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of five different solvents: xylol, eucalyptol, halothane, chloroform and orange oil on softening gutta-percha in simulated root canals. One drop of solvent was placed into a reservoir made in a simulated canal whose channel was previously instrumented and filled with gutta-percha and N-Rickert sealer. After 5 min, softening was evaluated for each solvent by the penetration of a spreader while applying force with a 442 Instron apparatus to reach a depth of 5 mm. The results were analyzed statistically by the Kruskal-Wallis test. Xylol and orange oil were better in softening gutta-percha than the other solvents. There was no significant difference between xylol and orange oil, but these were statistically different from eucalyptol, halothane and chloroform (p<0.01).

scholarly journals Debris and Smear Layer Removal from Oval Root Canals Comparing XP-Endo Finisher, EndoActivator, and Manual Irrigation: A SEM Evaluation

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (04) ◽  
pp. 626-633 ◽  
Author(s):  
Asmaa Alakshar ◽  
Abdul Rahman Mohammed Saleh ◽  
Mehmet Omer Gorduysus
Keyword(s):  
Root Canal ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Smear Layer ◽  
Layer Versus ◽  
Cleaning Efficiency ◽  
Radiographic Images ◽  
Root Canals ◽  
Single Root ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Objective This study aimed to assess and compare XP-Endo Finisher (XP) cleaning efficiency with respect to the amount of remaining debris and smear layer versus Max-I-Probe needle (CI), EndoActivator device (EA), and combination of XP-Endo Finisher file with EndoActivator device (XP+EA) in oval root canals. Materials and Methods This in vitro study was performed on 36 extracted single root/canal mandibular premolars. Radiographic images were taken in buccolingual and mesiodistal projections to evaluate the shape of the root canal and determine whether it met exclusion criteria. All teeth were decoronated and prepared using Reciproc (R40). The samples were divided randomly into four groups: CI, EA, XP, and XP + EA. The root canals were irrigated with 5 mL of 17% EDTA and 2.5% NaOCl, respectively. Apart from the CI group, both solutions were activated by using the tested techniques for 1 minute.The teeth were split longitudinally, and the best visible identified sections of the roots were used as the representing samples for scanning electron microscope (SEM) evaluation. Each half was divided into the following three parts: 1 mm from the anatomic apex and a standardized photomicrograph with 500x and 1500x magnifications for debris and smear layer were obtained. A five-grade scoring system was utilized to quantify the results at the coronal, middle, and apical regions. Statistical analysis was performed by using the Kruskal–Wallis and Mann–Whitney U tests. Results Group differences in debris and smear layer scores were found statistically significant for all locations as well as for overall assessment, except for the coronal third. Intragroup comparison of debris and smear layer in CI, EA, and XP had the minimum score at the middle third, with no significant difference compared with the coronal and apical thirds. XP + EA had less debris and smear layer score at the coronal third, significantly different from apical third.CI and EA had less debris and smear layer compared with XP and XP + EA at all locations with a significant difference at the middle and apical third (p < 0.05). Conclusion EA and CI showed less debris and smear layer than XP and XP + EA in the middle and apical third. The use of the XP in conjunction with the present irrigation protocol failed to have debris-free dentin surface in the apical portion of most of the root canals.

scholarly journals NSK reciprocating handpiece: in vitro comparative analysis of dentinal removal during root canal preparation by different operators

2006 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 10-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Márcia Helena Wagner ◽  
Fernando Branco Barletta ◽  
Magda de Souza Reis ◽  
Luciano Loureiro Mello ◽  
Ronise Ferreira ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Root Canal ◽  
The Other ◽  
Dental Student ◽  
Root Canal Preparation ◽  
Significance Level ◽  
Group 4 ◽  
Working Length ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
General Dentist

The purpose of this study was to assess dentin removal during root canal preparation by different operators using a NSK reciprocating handpiece. Eighty-four human single-rooted mandibular premolars were hand instrumented using Triple-Flex stainless-steel files (Kerr) up to #30, weighed in analytical balance and randomly assigned to 4 groups (n=21). All specimens were mechanically prepared at the working length with #35 to #45 Triple-Flex files (Kerr) coupled to a NSK (TEP-E10R, Nakanishi Inc.) reciprocating handpiece powered by an electric motor (Endo Plus; VK Driller). Groups 1 to 4 were prepared by a professor of Endodontics, an endodontist, a third-year dental student and a general dentist, respectively. Teeth were reweighed after root canal preparation. The difference between weights was calculated and the means of dentin removal in each group were analyzed statistically by ANOVA and Tukey's test at 5 % significance level. The greatest amount of dentin removal was found in group 4, followed by groups 2, 3 and 1. Group 4 differed statistically from the other groups regarding dentin removal means [p<0.001 (group 1); p=0.005 (group 2); and p=0.001 (group3)]. No statistically significant difference was found between groups 1 and 2 (p=0.608), 1 and 3 (p=0.914) and 2 and 3 (p=0.938). In conclusion, although the group prepared by a general dentist differed statistically from the other groups in terms of amount of dentin removal, this difference was clinically irrelevant. The NSK reciprocating handpiece powered by an electric engine was proved an effective auxiliary tool in root canal preparation, regardless of the operator's skills.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document