Nickel–Titanium rotary instruments: Development of the single-file systems

ABSTRACT Aim The purpose of this study was to determine the amount of extruded debris and irrigant associated with different single-file systems and one multiple-file system. Materials and methods Forty-five newly extracted single rooted primary canine teeth were used in this study. The root canals were instrumented using the reciprocating single-file system, the single-file rotary system and the multiple-file rotary system. A 10–6 precision micro-balance was used to calculate the amount of extruded debris and irrigant. The incubation period was set as 15 days at 37°C to obtain dry debris. The preparation time for instrumentation was also recorded. The data were statistically analyzed by Manova and Bonferroni adjustment. Results Considering the apically extruded debris, while there was statistically significant difference between Reciproc and OneShape groups (p < 0.05), no statistically significant difference was found among the other groups (p > 0.05). In terms of irrigation solution, although significant difference was obtained between the Reciproc and other two groups (p < 0.05), no statistically significant difference was obtained between the two rotary instruments (p > 0.05). Instrumentation was significantly faster using Reciproc than with all other instrument (p < 0.05). Conclusion All systems caused apical debris and irrigant extrusion. Full-sequences rotary instrumentation systems may be preferable for preparation primary teeth. Clinical significance This is the first study carrying out to compare both apical debris and irrigation solution extrusion with reciprocal and rotary single-file systems with other preparation systems in primary teeth. How to cite this article Kucukyilmaz E, Savas S, Saygili G, Uysal B. Evaluation of Apically Extruded Debris and Irrigant Produced by Different Nickel-Titanium Instrument Systems in Primary Teeth. J Contemp Dent Pract 2015;16(11):864-868.

Download Full-text

The Battle in Endodontics: A Review

Dental Journal of Advance Studies ◽

10.1055/s-0038-1671987 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 02 (02) ◽

pp. 059-063

Author(s):

Artinder Kaur ◽

Devendra Chaudhary ◽

Navneet Kukreja ◽

Abhishek Bansal ◽

Jyoti Bansal ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Stainless Steel ◽

Patient Safety ◽

Root Canal ◽

File Systems ◽

Nickel Titanium ◽

Cross Contamination ◽

Cutting Efficiency ◽

Root Canal Therapy ◽

Single File

AbstractNickel titanium rotary shaping files fundamentally changed everything in endodontics; conceptually, procedurally and economically as well. NiTi rotary files made root canal therapy more accessible and kind of fun for dentists, and dental companies were loved for making files that cost four times more than stainless steel hand files but delivered a ten times improvement. The single file systems need no disinfecting, cleaning, sterilizing and organizing the NiTi files, provide optimal cutting efficiency along with better control of file breakage and thus increased patient safety and no risk for cross contamination.

Download Full-text

Shaping ability of the profile 25/0.06 and protaper F2 in rotary motion, and reciproc in simulated canals

PeerJ ◽

10.7717/peerj.6109 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 6 ◽

pp. e6109

Author(s):

Gül Çelik ◽

Murat Maden ◽

Ahmet Savgat ◽

Hikmet Orhan

Keyword(s):

File Systems ◽

Apical Part ◽

Middle Part ◽

Nickel Titanium ◽

Human Teeth ◽

Root Canals ◽

Single File ◽

Working Length ◽

Shaping Ability ◽

Different Levels

Background Since the introduction of nickel–titanium (Ni–Ti) instruments to dentistry, a wide variety of Ni–Ti instruments have become commercially available. These Ni–Ti instruments are expensive, which limits their usage in developing countries and forces practitioners to use instruments repeatedly. Another problem is the possible prion cross-contamination associated with the multiple usage of endodontic instruments. In addition, the use of these instruments requires new skills and experience. In this article, the shaping capacities of two conventional rotary file systems, ProFile 25/0.06 and ProTaper F2, were reviewed and compared with the Reciproc single-file system. Methods A total of 45 simulated canals with 40° curvature, in clear resin blocks, were prepared using conventional rotary systems consisting of ProFile orifice shaping (OS) #3 and final flaring #25/.06, Reciproc R25, and ProTaper shaping file SX and finishing file F2. Pre-and post-instrumentation images were analyzed at ten different levels, using AutoCAD 2007 software. The measurement positions were defined in 1-mm intervals: positions 0–3 established the apical part, positions 4–6 constituted the middle part, and positions 7–10 established the coronal part of the canal. The amount of removed resin, the transportation, instrumentation time, change in working length (WL), instrumentation fractures, and the presence of ledge were evaluated. Data were analyzed using ANOVA, Kruskal–Wallis and independent t-test (p < 0.001). Results ProFile removed the least resin (p < 0.001) and caused less transportation than Reciproc and ProTaper, in total (p < 0.001). ProTaper caused more transportation ProFile and Reciproc in the apical part (p < 0.000). Reciproc caused more transportation than ProTaper and ProFile (p < 0.001), and the transportation tendency toward the inner aspect of the curvature in the middle part. Reciproc caused the less transportation than ProFile and ProTaper in the coronal part. The transportations tended to occur toward the outside of the curvature, except the middle part with Reciproc and at points 5 and 6 with ProTaper. There were no significant differences among the groups in terms of maintaining the original WL. Reciproc was significantly faster than the others group (p < 0.001). Only one instrument fracture (25/0.06 ProFile) was noted. All groups showed one ledge each. Discussion The results of the present study showed that both ProFile 25/06 and ProTaper F2, combined with a file used for coronal enlargement (OS3 and SX), have the potential to create satisfactory canal shape in the curved root canals. Further studies using real human teeth are needed to confirm our results.

Download Full-text