The Effects of Different Endodontic Access Cavity Design and Using XP-endo Finisher on the Reduction of Enterococcus faecalis in the Root Canal System

Assessment of Bacterial Load and Post-Endodontic Pain after One-Visit Root Canal Treatment Using Two Types of Endodontic Access Openings: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

The need for controlling bacteria and pain during root canal therapy is undeniable. This clinical trial aimed to assess whether there is a difference in colony-forming unit (CFU) reduction after instrumentation and post-endodontic pain after root canal treatment (RCT) using a traditional endodontic cavity (TEC) versus a conservative endodontic cavity (CEC). This clinical study was conducted on 89 patients designated for a single-visit RCT. Patients were allocated randomly (TEC n = 45 and CEC n = 44). The access opening was gained accordingly in each group by a single operator. A pre-instrumentation sample of root canal dentin was collected using an endodontic file; the second sample was collected similarly, right after shaping and cleaning the root canal. The CFU was calculated based on the samples collected. The pain level was recorded preoperatively and at 1, 7, and 21 days postoperatively utilizing a visual analog scale (VAS). There were no statistically significant differences in the CFU reduction between the TEC and CEC groups (p > 0.05). Additionally, there were no statistically significant differences found in postoperative pain levels between the TEC and CEC at 1, 7, and 21 days (p > 0.05). Despite the limitations of this study, both the CEC and TEC demonstrate a decrease in bacteria within the root canals and alleviate postoperative pain with no difference between them.

Impact XP-endo finisher on the 1-year follow-up success of posterior root canal treatments: a randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the clinical relevance of using the XP-endo Finisher as a supplementary tool to improve the success of root canal treatment of posterior teeth with apical periodontitis, as assessed by 1-year follow-up.

METHODS

A randomized clinical trial was conducted with 92 posterior teeth with apical periodontitis. Root canal treatment was performed using a single reciprocating file, with or without the supplementary use of the XP-endo Finisher. The status of apical periodontitis was assessed using the periapical index (PAI) at baseline and 1 year follow-up. Changes on PAI indicated that the lesions were healed, healing, or not healed. Successful treatments were defined as healed or healing lesions without clinical symptoms. Chi-square analysis and logistic regression were used for data analysis (α = 0.05).

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in the distribution of healing status between the XP-endo Finisher group and the control group (p = 0.690). The success rates were also similar, with 81% in the XP-endo Finisher group and 78% in the control group. However, gender had a significant impact on success rates, with higher rates observed in females.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the XP-endo Finisher file as a supplementary tool did not affect the success rate of root canal treatment in posterior teeth with apical periodontitis. The findings indicate that the XP-endo Finisher file has limited clinical relevance in improving treatment outcomes for root canal treatment in posterior teeth with apical periodontitis.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study protocol was registered in the Brazilian Clinical Trials Registry under identification number RBR-76w7cj (June 19, 2018).

Centric versus eccentric engine-driven endodontic instrument design for microbial load reduction-A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials

This systematic review assessed the clinical influence of centric and eccentric engine-driven instrument design for reduction in microbial load in infected root canal system. The literature search was conducted in electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Lilacs and Google Scholar) and grey literature till June 2022. The search strategy followed the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Qualitative and quantitative synthesis was conducted based on the guidelines of the Cochrane Handbook. The risk of bias was assessed using the revised Cochrane criteria and quality of evidence was conducted using the Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation tool. Out of 28 papers, only five papers met the inclusion criteria of this review. Studies showed reduction in microbial load after instrumentation using centric or eccentric instruments with no statistically significant difference in the meta-analysis. In conclusion, there is low-grade evidence suggesting that microbial reduction is similar using centric and eccentric instruments.

Is XP-endo Finisher a better treatment option for its efficacy against intracanal bacteria for post-treatment apical periodontitis cases than EndoActivator?

To investigate the efficacy of the supplementary use of a rotary agitation method [XP-endo Finisher (XPF)] and sonically-activated irrigation [EndoActivator (EA)], using droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) on reducing the bacterial load in previously root canal treated teeth with apical periodontitis. Twenty patients with post-treatment apical periodontitis were allocated into two groups according to the irrigation activation method used: XPF and EA group. Total bacterial loads, as well as the amount of Enterococcus faecalis (E. faecalis) were determined before (S1) and after (S2) chemomechanical preparation, and after final irrigation activation (S3) by means of ddPCR. The bacterial copy numbers were compared between groups using the Friedman test (Nonparametric Repeated Measures ANOVA). When the groups were examined in terms of gender, age, number of root canals, periapical index score, sterility control total bacteria (SCTB), S1- and S2-total bacteria copy number, it was found that there was no statistical difference between the XPF group and the EA group (p > 0.05). Subsequent activation (S3) resulted in a significant microbial reduction in both XPF and EA groups, both of which reduced significantly more bacteria than chemomechanical instrumentation (S2) (p < 0.0001). On the contrary, S3-total bacteria copy number of the EA group was lower than the XPF group (p < 0.0147). There was no statistical difference between the XPF group and the EA group in terms of E. faecalis copy number (p > 0.05). Although both the XPF and the EA optimised the antibacterial efficiency of chemomechanical preparation in previously root canal-treated teeth with apical periodontitis, a lower total bacterial copy number was achieved with the EA application than the XPF application.

Factors that affect the outcomes of root canal treatment and retreatment-A reframing of the principles

This paper undertakes a broad and comprehensive synthesis of relevant clinical, biological, biomechanical, technical and healthcare services data to understand the factors affecting outcomes of periapical healing after root canal (re)treatment. The medical and dental evidence-based era (1980-present) is contextualized with the earlier evidence drive in endodontics (1911-1940) triggered by the focal infection era. The current evidence-based approach has a sharper focus on evidence quality and derivation of practice guidelines. Contrary views question whether guideline-driven, or expertise-development-driven endeavours would best serve outcome improvement in society. The endodontic discipline functions in a broad healthcare framework and sustains industrial, economic and trend pressures that may be deemed to influence outcomes. The nature of root canal treatment and the challenges in determining the factors that affect its outcomes is discussed. The factors potentially affecting periapical healing after root canal treatment are classified into pre-operative, intra-operative and postoperative groups. These categories subsume multiple elements with interactive influences, creating a complex picture, further confounded by some apparently surprising, counter-intuitive and contradictory findings. The technical versus biological conundrum in root canal treatment continues to cause cognitive dissonance. However, due reflection and cross-discipline-synthesis resolve the apparent data conflicts into a very simple, consistent and plausible picture of how root canal treatment works and the key factors that affect periapical healing. Root canal retreatment is considered mainly in the context of its differences from primary treatment as the majority of factors influencing outcomes are common to both. The exceptional difference is that retreatments have a proportionately reduced probability of healing by virtue of compromised apical root canal ramification access or modified host/infection interactions. Root canal (re)treatment outcomes are dominantly influenced by the nature of prior dynamic host/infection interaction (pre-operative patient factors) and how the direction of this dynamic is influenced by two factors: (1) the active efficacy of the operators' root canal treatment protocol to sustain a microbial ecological shift (intra-operative treatment factors) and dampen periapical inflammation; and (2) the passive ability of the functional tooth (and its restoration margin) to maintain its integrity to resist infection reversal (postoperative restorative factors).

Impact of contracted endodontic cavities on instrumentation efficacy-A systematic review

The aim of the present systematic review was to summarise and evaluate the studies comparing the role of contracted endodontic cavities (CECs) and traditional endodontic cavities (TECs) in terms of instrumentation efficacy. The present systematic review comprised of a search of the online databases of Cochrane, PubMed, Google Scholar and grey literature. The articles which were pertaining to instrumentation efficacy in contracted and traditional endodontic cavities were selected based on the PRISMA checklist. Out of the 660 articles which were obtained, irrelevant articles were excluded and a total of 17 articles were selected for this systematic review which assessed the instrumentation efficacy. Eleven studies compared the volume of dentin removed and canal transportation ability. Four studies compared the pulp debridement, and two studies compared the anti-bacterial efficacy between the two groups. The extrusion of debris between the groups was compared by one study. Out of the 17 studies included, 11 studies proved that contracted endodontic cavities negatively impacted the instrumentation efficacy. Hence, the data suggest that the traditional endodontic access cavities have better results when comparing the instrumentation efficacy.

Impact of Different Access Cavity Designs and Ni–Ti Files on the Elimination of Enterococcus faecalis from the Root Canal System: An In Vitro Study

The present research aimed to reveal the in vitro effects of different endodontic file systems utilizing different endodontic access cavity designs on the elimination of Enterococcus faecalis from root canal systems. One hundred and fifty mandibular molar teeth were separated into three groups with respect to the access cavity design: traditional endodontic cavity (TEC), conservative endodontic cavity (CEC), and truss access cavity (TAC) (n = 50). After access cavity preparation, inolulation of teeth with E. faecalis was undertaken for 21 days. Following the first sampling (S1), further division of the groups into five subgroups (n = 10) was performed: ProTaper Gold, 2Shape, TruNatomy, Reciproc Blue, and WaveOne Gold. After instrumentation, bacterial sampling (S2) was performed. Bacterial reduction was evaluated in colony-forming units/mL, and statistical analysis was carried out. The E. faecalis count decreased significantly in all groups (p < 0.05). The range of mean values for a decrease in E. faecalis in log numbers was lowest in the TAC and Reciproc Blue groups, while the highest values of bacterial reduction were detected in the TEC and ProTaper Gold groups. The highest level of antibacterial action was obtained with the use of ProTaper Gold compared to the other file systems tested.

Present status and future directions - Minimal endodontic access cavities

In the last decades, the move of Medicine towards minimally invasive treatments is notorious and scientifically grounded. As Dentistry naturally follows its footsteps, minimal access preparation also became a trend topic in the endodontic field. This procedure aims to maximize preservation of dentine tissue, backed up by the idea that this is an effective way to reduce the incidence of post-treatment tooth fracture. However, with the assessment of the body of evidence on this topic, it is possible to observe some key-points (a) the demand for nomenclature standardization, (b) the requirement of specific tools such as ultra-flexible instruments, visual magnification, superior illumination, and three-dimensional imaging technology, (c) minimally invasive treatment does not seem to affect orifice location and mechanical preparation when using adequate armamentarium, but it (d) may impair adequate canal cleaning, disinfection, and filling procedures, and also (e) it displays contradictory results regarding the ability to increase the tooth strengthen compared to the traditional access cavity. In spite of that, it is undeniable that methodological flaws of some benchtop studies using extracted teeth may be responsible for the conflicting data, thus triggering the need for more sophisticated devices/facilities and specifically designed research in an attempt to make it clear the role of the access size/design on long-term teeth survival. Moreover, it is inevitable that a clinical approach like minimal endodontic access cavities that demands complex tools and skilled and experienced operators bring to the fore doubts on its educational impact mainly when confronted with the conflicting scientific output, ultimately provoking a cost-benefit analysis of its implementation as a routine technique. In addition, this review discusses the ongoing scientific and clinical status of minimally invasive access cavities aiming to input an in-depth and unbiased view over the rationale behind them, uncovering not only the related conceptual and scientific flaws, but also outlining future directions for research and clinical practices. The conclusions attempt to skip from passionate disputes highlighting the current body of evidence as weak and incomplete to guide decision making, demanding the development of a close-to-in-situ laboratory model or a large and well-controlled clinical trial to solve this matter.

Influence of minimally invasive endodontic access cavities and bonding status of resin composites on the mechanical property of endodontically-treated teeth: A finite element study

OBJECTIVE

To study the mechanical behavior of endodontically-treated teeth with minimally invasive endodontic access cavities and resin composite restorations under different bonding conditions using finite element analysis (FEA).

METHODS

Four Class-II endodontic access cavities including the mesio-occlusal minimally-invasive (MO-MIE), mesio-occlusal conventional (MO-CONV), disto-occlusal minimally-invasive (DO-MIE), and disto-occlusal conventional (DO-CONV) cavities were prepared in 3D-printed maxillary first molars. Each tooth was subjected to root canal preparation and scanned using micro-CT to provide a 3D structural model which was virtually restored with resin composite. An intact 3D-printed molar was used as control. FEA was conducted under a 250-N vertical load. Three different interfacial bonding conditions between dentin/enamel and resin composite were considered, i.e. fully bonded, partially debonded, and fully debonded. The maximum principal stress of dentin and the normal tensile stress at the interfaces were recorded. The risk factor of failure for each component was then calculated.

RESULTS

In the fully-bonded tooth, the dentin-composite interface showed significantly higher stress and a higher risk factor than dentin, indicating that debonding at the dentin-composite interface would occur prior to dentin fracture. With the dentin-composite interface debonded, the enamel-composite interface exhibited higher stress and a higher risk factor than dentin, indicating that debonding at the enamel-composite interface would occur next, also prior to dentin fracture. With the resin composite fully debonded from the tooth, stress in dentin increased significantly. Irrespective of the bonding status, the CONV groups exhibited higher median stresses in dentin than the MIE groups.

SIGNIFICANCE

Within the limitation of this study, it was shown that debonding of the resin composite restoration increased the stress in dentin and hence the risk of dentin fracture in endodontically-restored teeth. Minimally-invasive access cavities could better safeguard the fracture resistance of interproximally-restored teeth compared to conventional ones.

Current strategies for conservative endodontic access cavity preparation techniques-systematic review, meta-analysis, and decision-making protocol

OBJECTIVES

To assess related studies and discuss the clinical implications of endodontic access cavity (AC) designs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review of studies comparing the fracture resistance and/or endodontic outcomes between different AC designs was conducted in two electronic search databases (PubMed and Web of Science) following the PRISMA guidelines. Study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment were performed. Meta-analyses were undertaken for fracture resistance and root canal detection, with the level of significance set at 0.05 (P = 0.05).

RESULTS

A total of 33 articles were included in this systematic review. The global evaluation of the risk of bias in the included studies was assessed as moderate, and the level of evidence was rated as low. Four types of AC designs were categorized: traditional (TradAC), conservative (ConsAC), ultraconservative (UltraAC), and truss (TrussAC). Their impact on fracture resistance, cleaning/disinfection, procedural errors, root canal detection, treatment time, apical debris extrusion, and root canal filling was discussed. Meta-analysis showed that compared to TradAC, (i) there is a significant higher fracture resistance of teeth with ConsAC, TrussAC, or ConsAC/TrussAC when all marginal ridges are preserved (P < 0.05), (ii) there is no significant effect of the type of AC on the fracture resistance of teeth when one or two marginal ridges are lost (P > 0.05), and (iii) there is a significantly higher risk of undetected canals with ConsAC if not assisted by dental operating microscope and ultrasonic troughing (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Decreasing the AC extent does not necessarily present mechanical and biological advantages especially when one or more surfaces of the tooth structure are lost. To date, the evidence available does not support the application of TrussAC. UltraAC might be applied in limited occasions.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Maintaining the extent of AC design as small as practical without jeopardizing the root canal treatment quality remains a pragmatic recommendation. Different criteria can guide the practitioner for the optimal extent of AC outline form which varies from case to case.

The effectiveness of the supplementary use of the XP-endo Finisher on bacteria content reduction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objectives

This systematic review evaluated the efficacy of the supplementary use of the XP-endo Finisher on bacteria content reduction in the root canal system.

Materials and Methods

In-vitro studies evaluating the use of the XP-endo Finisher on bacteria content were searched in four databases in July 2020. Two authors independently screened the studies for eligibility. Data were extracted, and risk of bias was assessed. Data were meta-analyzed by using random-effects model to compare the effect of the supplementary use (experimental) or not (control) of the XP-endo Finisher on bacteria counting reduction, and results from different endodontic protocols were combined. Four studies met the inclusion criteria while 1 study was excluded from the meta-analysis due to its high risk of bias and outlier data. The 3 studies that made it to the meta-analysis had an unclear risk of bias for at least one criterion.

Results

No heterogeneity was observed among the results of the studies included in the meta-analysis. The study excluded from the meta-analysis assessing the bacteria counting deep in the dentin demonstrated further bacteria reduction upon the use of the XP-endo Finisher.

Conclusions

This systematic review found no evidence supporting the supplementary use of the XP-endo Finisher on further bacteria counting the reduction in the root canal.

Ten years of minimally invasive access cavities in Endodontics: a bibliometric analysis of the 25 most-cited studies

Objectives

This study aimed to analyze the main features of the 25 most-cited articles in minimally invasive access cavities.

Materials and Methods

An electronic search was conducted on the Clarivate Analytics' Web of Science ‘All Databases’ to identify the most-cited articles related to this topic. Citation counts were cross-matched with data from Elsevier's Scopus and Google Scholar. Information about authors, contributing institutions and countries, year and journal of publication, study design and topic, access cavity, and keywords were analyzed.

Results

The top 25 most-cited articles received a total of 572 (Web of Science), 1,160 (Google Scholar) and 631 (Scopus) citations. It was observed a positive significant association between the number of citations and age of publication (r = 0.6907, p < 0.0001); however, there was no significant association regarding citation density and age of publication (r = −0.2631, p = 0.2038). The Journal of Endodontics made the highest contribution (n = 15, 60%). The United States had the largest number of publications (n = 7) followed by Brazil (n = 4), with the most contributions from the University of Tennessee and Grande Rio University (n = 3), respectively. The highest number of most-cited articles were ex vivo studies (n = 16), and ‘fracture resistance’ was the major topic studied (n = 10).

Conclusions

This study revealed a growing interest for researchers in the field of minimally invasive access cavities. Future trends are focused on the expansion of collaborative networks and the conduction of laboratory studies on under-investigated parameters.

Effectiveness of XP-Endo Finisher and passive ultrasonic irrigation on intracanal medicament removal from root canals: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

XP-Endo Finisher (XPF) and passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI) are commonly used in intracanal medicament removal. The effectiveness of these two techniques needs to be compared, and evidence-based research should be conducted.

Methods

A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar up to December 20th, 2020. The outcomes of the included trials were pooled into the Cochrane Collaboration’s Review Manager 5.3 software. Cochrane’s risk-of-bias tool 2.0 was applied to assess the risk of bias.

Results

Nine articles were included in this systematic review and processed for data extraction, and eight studies were identified for meta-analysis. In general, the use of PUI showed better medicament removal effectiveness than XPF (odds ratio [OR]: 3.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.96–4.86; P < 0.001). PUI was also significantly more efficient than XPF in the apical third (OR: 3.42; 95% CI, 1.32–8.84; P = 0.01). For trials using sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) alone, PUI was also significantly more effective than XPF on intracanal medicaments removal (OR: 5.23; 95% CI, 2.79–9.82; P < 0.001). However, there was no significant difference between PUI and XPF when NaOCl and ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) were used in combination (OR: 1.51; 95% CI, 0.74–3.09; P = 0.26). In addition, for studies whose intracanal medicament periods were two weeks, the effectiveness of PUI was statistically better than the XPF (OR: 7.73; 95% CI, 3.71–16.07; P < 0.001). Nevertheless, for trials whose intracanal medicament time was one week or over two weeks, no differences between the XPF and PUI were found (OR: 1.54; 95% CI, 0.74–3.22; P = 0.25) (OR: 1.42; 95% CI, 0.44–4.61; P = 0.56).

Conclusions

The meta-analysis is the first study to quantitatively compare the effectiveness of XPF and PUI techniques on intracanal medicaments removal. With rigorous eligibility criteria, the study only included high-quality randomised controlled trials. The study indicated that PUI might be superior over XPF techniques for removing intracanal medicaments from artificial standardized grooves and cavities in the root canal system. The anatomical areas, irrigation protocol, and intracanal medicaments time may influence the cleaning efficacy.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12903-021-01644-7.

Disinfecting and Shaping Type I C-shaped Root Canals: A Correlative Micro-computed Tomographic and Molecular Microbiology Study

INTRODUCTION

This ex vivo study compared the disinfection and shaping abilities of 2 preparation protocols in C-shaped canals.

METHODS

Mandibular second molars with type I C-shaped canals were pair matched based on micro-computed tomographic (micro-CT) analysis and distributed into 2 groups. The canals were contaminated with a mixed bacterial culture and prepared using 2 protocols, both with 2.5% sodium hypochlorite irrigation: XP-endo Shaper (FKG Dentaire, La Chaux-de-Fonds, Switzerland) supplemented with XP-endo Finisher (FKG Dentaire) (XP-E) and BioRaCe (FKG Dentaire) supplemented with a Hedström file (Dentsply/Sirona, Tulsa, OK) (BR-Hed). Micro-CT scans and intracanal bacteriologic samples were taken before (scan #1 and sample 1) and after preparation (scan #2 and sample 2) and after the supplementary step (scan #3 and sample 3). Canal shaping was evaluated by micro-CT imaging, and disinfection was assessed by quantitative polymerase chain reaction.

RESULTS

Micro-CT data from the XP-E (n = 21) and BR-Hed (n = 23) protocols revealed no significant differences between groups regarding shaping parameters (canal volume, surface area, structure model index, and prepared walls) after preparation and after the supplementary step (P > .05). All these parameters significantly increased after each preparation step (P < .05), except for structure model index changes after the XP-endo Finisher (P > .05). Bacteriologic data from the XP-E (n = 21) and BR-Hed (n = 22) groups showed that 14 (66.7%) and 10 (45.5%) S2 samples still had detectable bacteria, respectively. The corresponding figures for supplementary steps with the XP-endo Finisher and Hedström file were 11 (52.4%) and 10 (45.5%), respectively. Bacterial counts in sample 1 significantly decreased in samples 2 and 3 in both groups (P < .01). Intragroup comparison between sample 2 and sample 3 showed a 66% reduction in counts after using the Hedström file and 18% after using the XP-endo Finisher (P > .05 for both groups). The quantitative bacterial reduction was not different between groups (P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

The XP-endo Shaper and BioRaCe systems have similar disinfecting and shaping abilities in C-shaped canals. Supplementary steps with the Hedström file and the XP-endo Finisher were similarly effective in improving shaping, but this was not sufficient to enhance disinfection. About half of the cases, in both groups, still harbored detectable amounts of bacteria.

Current status on minimal access cavity preparations: a critical analysis and a proposal for a universal nomenclature

In the last decade, several access cavity designs involveing minimal removal of tooth tissue have been described for gaining entry to pulp chambers during root canal treatment. The premise behind this concept assumes that maximum preservation of as much of the pulp chamber roof as possible during access preparation would maintain the fracture resistance of teeth following root canal treatment. However, the smaller the access cavity, the more difficult it may be to visualize and debride the pulp chamber as well as locate, shape, clean and fill the canals. At the same time, a small access cavity may increase the risk of iatrogenic complications as a result of poor visibility, which may have an impact on treatment outcome. This study aimed to critically analyse the literature on minimal access cavity preparations, propose new nomenclature based on self-explanatory abbreviations and highlight the areas in which more research is required. The search was conducted without restrictions using specifics terms and descriptors in four databases. A complementary screening of the references within the selected studies, as well as a manual search in the highest impact journals in endodontics, namely International Endodontic Journal and Journal of Endodontics, was also performed. The initial search retrieved 1831 publications. The titles and abstracts of these papers were reviewed, and the full text of 94 studies was assessed. Finally, a total of 28 studies were identified as evaluating the influence of minimally invasive access cavity designs on the fracture resistance of teeth and on the different stages of root canal treatment (orifice location, canal shaping, canal cleaning, canal filling and retreatment). Overall, the studies had major methodological drawbacks and reported inadequate and/or inconclusive results on the utility of minimally invasive access preparations. Furthermore, they offered limited scientific evidence to support the use of minimally invasive access cavities to improve the outcome of root canal treatment and retreatment; they also provided little evidence that they preserved the fracture resistance of root filled teeth to a greater extent than traditional access cavity preparations. It was concluded that at present, there is a lack of supporting evidence for the introduction of minimally invasive access cavity preparation into routine clinical practice and/or training of undergraduate and postgraduate students.