Microtomographic Evaluation of Canal Centralization and Dentine Removal after Canal Preparation with Two Rotary Systems: HyFlex EDM and ProTaper Next

Substance P/calcitonin gene-related peptide and their receptors expression in human periodontal ligament after root canal preparation with five different systems

AIM

The purpose of this study was to quantify the effect of five different root canal preparation instruments on Substance P (SP), Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) and their receptors expression in healthy human periodontal ligament.

METHODOLOGY

STROBE guidelines were used to design a study using 60 periodontal ligament samples obtained from healthy lower premolars where extraction was indicated for orthodontic reasons. Prior to extraction 40 of these premolars were equally divided into four groups and root canals were prepared using different systems: Mtwo, Reciproc Blue, HyFlex EDM and Plex-V. Ten premolars were prepared with hand files and served as a positive control group. The remaining 10 premolars where extracted without treatment and served as a negative control group. All periodontal ligament samples were processed to measure the expression of SP, CGRP and their receptors by radioimmunoassay. Kruskal-Wallis and Duncan tests were performed to determine statistically significant differences between the groups for each variable.

RESULTS

Greater expression of all the peptides measured were found in the hand-file preparation group, followed by the Reciproc Blue, Mtwo, HyFlex EDM and Plex-V groups. The lower SP, CGRP and their receptors values were for the intact teeth control group. Kruskal-Wallis test showed statistically significant differences amongst groups (p < .001). Dunn post-hoc tests showed statistically significant differences in SP, CGRP and their receptors expression between the intact teeth and the hand-file and Reciproc Blue groups. Hand-file group showed significant differences with the other groups, except with Reciproc Blue, where no differences were observed in any of the peptides measured. Finally, no differences were observed between Plex-V and HyFlex in any of the peptides measured.

CONCLUSIONS

Root canal preparation with hand files and Reciproc Blue generates the highest expression of SP, CGRP, NK1 and CGRP1R in human periodontal ligament, whilst Plex-V and HyFlex maintain the basal expression of neuropeptides and their receptors. Mtwo showed intermediate results between Reciproc Blue and HyFlex.

Unprepared areas and centralization of oval canals prepared with WaveOne Gold or XP-endo Shaper: microcomputed tomographic analyses

Current instrumentation systems cannot fully prepare oval root canal systems. This may cause accumulation of hard tissue debris and fail to eliminate bacteria from areas inaccessible to instrumentation, which could perpetuate periapical inflammation and jeopardize the success of endodontic treatment.

Aim

To evaluate the performance of two endodontic systems in oval canals by investigating the changes in volume, unprepared areas, and centering ability of XP-endo Shaper (XPS) and WaveOne Gold (WOG) in oval canals using microcomputed tomography (micro-CT).

Materials and Method

Thirty mandibular canines were scanned before and after preparation with WOG (25/.07 and 35/.06) or XPS (30/.01) to evaluate the volume, surface area, and canal centralization at 4 mm and 10 mm from the apical foramen.

Results

Volume and surface area increased significantly after preparation with both systems (p<0.05). However, no significant difference was observed in the unprepared areas, regarding either the entire canal (26.21% for WOG and 30.10% for XPS), or the apical segment (18.82% for WOG and 14.63% for XPS) (p >0.05).

Conclusions

Both systems maintained canal centralization, with no difference between them. XPS and WOG had similar shaping abilities in the mandibular canine, but left almost one third of the unprepared areas.

Microtomographic Assessment of the Shaping Ability of the Hyflex CM and XP-endo Shaper Systems in Curved Root Canals

OBJECTIVE

 This study compared the shaping ability of the Hyflex CM and XP-endo Shaper rotary file systems in curved mesial canals of mandibular molars using micro-computed tomography.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

 Seventeen mesial roots of extracted first mandibular molars with two independent mesial canals were scanned before and after root canal preparation with the tested rotatory file systems. Each mesial canal from the same specimen was prepared with one of the two systems. The parameters analyzed were canal centering (transportation) for the cervical, middle, and apical segments, as well as for the entire canal (0-10 mm from the apex); and canal volume increase, canal surface area increase, and unprepared canal walls for two segments, 0 to 4 mm and 0 to 10 mm from the apex.

RESULTS

 There was no significant difference between both systems regarding canal centering (transportation), volume increase, and unprepared canal walls for the 0 to 10 mm segment (p> 0.05); however, a significant difference was observed for the 0 to 4 mm segment (p <0.01), where the Hyflex CM left 28.46% of unprepared walls and XP-endo Shaper left 13.26%.

CONCLUSIONS

 The shaping ability of the two tested rotatory file systems in mesial roots of first mandibular molars was similar for all parameters in all the segments evaluated, except for the 0 to 4 mm segment, where XP-endo Shaper left a smaller area of unprepared canal walls than Hyflex CM.