Comparison of centring ability and transportation between four nickel titanium instrumentation techniques by micro-computed tomography

Shaping ability of Procodile and R6 Reziflow nickel-titanium reciprocating instruments in curved mesial root canals of mandibular molars: A MicroCT study

To compare the shaping ability of Procodile and R6 Reziflow instruments used in reciprocating motion in severely curved root canals, assessed with micro-computed tomography (μCT). Fourteen extracted human mandibular first molars were randomly assigned to two instrumentation techniques (n = 14 mesial root canals): Procodile or R6 Reziflow. For both groups, root canals were prepared to the working length up to a size 25, .06 taper. Molars were virtually divided into apical, middle and coronal thirds and μCT was used to scan all samples pre- and post-root canal. Canal transportation, centring ability, volume, surface area and unprepared area were evaluated. Geometrical parameter changes were compared with preoperative values (one-way analyses of variance and Tukey multiple comparison post-hoc test) between groups and Student t-test within groups (α = 0.05) Significantly less transportation was observed associated with the Procodile technique in the molar's coronal third compared to the R6 Reziflow technique (p < .05). No significant differences in root canal centring ability, volume, surface area and unprepared area were observed. Procodile showed a lower percentage increase of surface area compared to R6 Reziflow (p < .05). The Procodile and R6 Reziflow techniques applied to first molar root canal performed similarly except for the less transportation observed in the coronal third using Procodile. RESEARCH HIGHLIGHTS: MicroCT analysis of canal geometry before and after instrumentation revealed that Procodile and R6 Reziflow showed a similar shaping ability to shape curved root canals without substantially modifications of the original tooth anatomy.

Comparative Assessment of Canal Transportation, Dentin Loss, and Remaining Root Filling Material by Different Retreatment Files An In vitro Cross-Sectional Study

Aim:

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the centering ability, canal transportation and efficacy of re-treatment rotary and hand files in removing Gutta Percha from root canals using Cone Beam Computed Tomography(CBCT).

Materials and Methods:

Sixty extracted human maxillary anteriors were obturated and randomly divided into three groups. Root fillings were removed with ProTaper Universal retreatment system, R-Endo system, and Hedstrom files. CBCT scans were taken.

Statistical Analysis and Results:

The data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS 15.0, IBM). The mean and standard deviation among the groups was calculated by one-way analysis of variance, Kruskal–Wallis, and Mann– Whitney U-tests, and the comparison among the various groups was done by post hoc Tukey's test. A statistically significant amount of remaining root canal filling material and canal transportation was noted (P < 0.05).

Conclusion:

No system completely removed the root filling material from root canals. Manual instrumentation resulted in more dentin loss and canal transportation than rotary file system.

A Critical Review of Methods for Quantitative Evaluation of Root Canal Transportation

INTRODUCTION

A comparison between root canal transportation studies is nearly impossible because of nonstandardized transportation evaluation methods. The aim of the present review was to search, compare, and critically discuss transportation evaluation methods.

METHODS

A search of PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, ScienceDirect, and reference lists of articles was conducted up to March 2020 using appropriate key words to identify transportation evaluation methods. The methods in the included articles were extracted, compared, and categorized.

RESULTS

Seventy-four articles using original methods were selected. All studies share 3 main steps: image acquisition, image measurements, and calculation of parameters. Images were acquired by photography, radiography, and computed tomographic imaging. Two types of measurements were used: the amount of removed material and the canal center point distance. The parameters were calculated and reported as distance or ratio. Relationships between the different transportation parameters were found and confirmed with mathematical simulation.

CONCLUSIONS

Although methods were proposed as being novel, similarities between them were found, enabling the classification of the methods and identifying correlations. The canal center point distance is the most suitable for the description of canal transportation because it is comprehensible and it relates to the mathematical concept of translation. Removed material-based measurements are double the value of the canal center point distance. Ratio parameters are not suitable for reporting transportation.

Effects of a Novel NiTi Thermomechanical Treatment on the Geometric Features of the Prepared Root Canal System

Objectives: This study aimed to compare the ex vivo performance of two rotary nickel–titanium (NiTi) systems with similar designs but manufactured from martensitic and austenitic alloys, the One Curve (OC) and One Shape (OS) rotary endodontic files, respectively. Methods: Forty separate mesial canals of 20 extracted mandibular molars were scanned using micro-computed tomography (CT), which were divided into 2 groups and instrumented with OC and OS, respectively. Post-instrumentation micro-CT scans were evaluated using validated computer algorithms to compare changes in canal thickness, surface area, structure model index (SMI) scores, volume of removed dentin, percentage of untreated canal surface, percentage of curvature straightening, and the amount of canal transportation. Results: Both files led to significant changes in the basic root canal geometry, with no preparation errors and no statistically significant differences. However, OC treatment resulted in significantly less curvature straightening (17.30%; 10.77%) (independent samples t test, p < 0.05) and less apical transportation (55.11 µm; 33.15 µm) (Mann–Whitney U, test p < 0.05) compared to OS treatment. Transportation values in the middle and coronal thirds were statistically similar (independent sample t-test, p > 0.05). OC treatment produced significantly less straightening and less apical transportation than OS.

Assessment of root canal transportation of 2Shape and ProTaper gold in mandibular molar mesial canals: A micro-computed tomographic study

The aim of this study was to compare shaping abilities of Protaper Gold® (PTG) and 2Shape® (TS) by using a new automatic process and micro-computed tomography (Micro-CT). 32 first mandibular molars with two separate mesial canals were selected. Only mesial roots were prepared with PTG and TS. Pre- and post-operative scans were performed using Micro-CT to provide volumes with a voxel size of 20 μm. Volumes, non-instrumented area, amount of transportation and centering ability in coronal, middle and apical third shaping time and procedural errors were recorded. TS and PTG increased the endodontic volume of 2.98 mm³ (±1.56) and 3.21 mm³ (±1.78) respectively with no statistical difference (p = .168) and no procedural errors. No significant difference was found concerning canal transportation among groups but only within the same group PTG (p value < .001) and TS (p value < .001). The mean centering ratio was significantly different only between the section levels for PTG (p value < .001) and TS (p value = .01); it was significantly reduced in the cervical third. The percentage of untouched canal walls ranged between 29.78% (±15.145) and 36.60% (±11.968) respectively for PTG and TS with no statistical difference among groups (p value = .168). TS and PTG with post machining heat treatment were able to produce centered preparations with no significant difference or procedural errors. TS system provided a shorter preparation time than PTG files.

Influence of endodontic cavity access on curved root canal preparation with ProDesign Logic rotary instruments

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluates whether endodontic cavity access into molars influences the chemomechanical preparation of curved root canals.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty mesiobuccal canals of maxillary molars were randomly divided into two experimental groups (n = 10), according to the type of endodontic access analyzed (conventional and minimally invasive). The preparations were made by a single operator, and the canals, after access, were prepared with Logic system (0.25, 0.04 taper) along the working length. Samples were scanned before and after canal preparation (SMX-90CT Plus (Shimadzu® microtomograph operated with 70 kV, 100 uA, FOV (XY) 13.3 mm, FOV (Z) 7.0 mm, and voxel size 0.013 mm/Pix)) to match canal volumes. Images were analyzed to evaluate surface areas, transport, and centralization at 3 mm from the canal entrance and 3 mm from the apex (OnDemand3D^TM Dental software). Student's t test with a significance level of 5% was used for the statistical analysis.

RESULTS

Regardless of the position of the analyzed canals, there was no difference in the prepared area regarding the transport and centralization of the endodontic instrument between the two types of cavity accesses performed.

CONCLUSIONS

The conventional and minimally invasive access did not influence the action of the 0.25 and 0.04 taper instrument during the curved root canal preparation.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The type of endodontic access did not influence the action of the rotary instrument during the curved root canal preparation.

Micro-Computed Tomography (Micro-CT) Evaluation of Effects of Different Rotary Glide Path Techniques on Canal Transportation and Centering in Curved Root Canals

BACKGROUND The aim of this study was to evaluate the ability of different rotary glide path techniques to maintain canal anatomy by comparing canal transportation and centring abilities in curved root canals using X-ray micro-computed tomography (micro-CT). MATERIAL AND METHODS We selected 36 root canals and randomly assigned them to 3 groups. The first group was instrumented using Pathfile (PF) 1 and PF2, the second group using PF2, and the third group using a Proglider (PG) instrument. Selected tooth samples were scanned using a micro-CT system with 8-µm resolution. Centring ability and transportation were compared at 5 levels: 0.5 mm (A0) and 1 mm (A1) from apical foramen, at the point of maximum root curvature (C0), at 1 mm below it (C-), and 1 mm above it (C+). Area, ratio of areas (RA), perimeter, centroid shift, mean diameter, and ratio of diameter ratios (RDR) were assessed. RESULTS In all groups, there were no significant differences between different levels in all parameters (p>0.05). In group 1, the centroid shift was greatest at A0 and C-, and the least impact was at C0. In group 2, the biggest impacts were at C- and A0, and the smallest at C+. In group 3, the greatest impacts were at A0 and A1, and the smallest at C0. CONCLUSIONS All 3 instrument groups performed very similarly, without significant differences in canal-shaping parameters. Overall, using just PF2 instead of PF 1 and 2 created very similar shaping results, which could reduce the number of instruments needed and the cost of treatment.

Comparative evaluation of the shaping ability of single-file system versus multi-file system in severely curved root canals

Background/purpose

Reciprocating single-file systems are the latest nickel-titanium instruments and little information is available concerning the shaping ability of these new systems. Comparison of these single-file systems with well-known rotary multi-file systems is necessary. The purpose of this study was to compare the shaping ability of single-file system (WaveOne, WO) versus multiple-file system (ProTaper Next, PTN) in severely curved canals.

Materials and methods

A total of 20 severely curved canals were prepared with WO or PTN. Micro-computed tomography was used to scan the specimens before and after instrumentation. Differences between two groups in canal surface area, volume, Structure Model Index (SMI), thickness, straightening, the ratio of uninstrumented surface area and canal transportation were evaluated.

Results

The outline of the canals after preparation showed smooth taper in both groups. Canal surface area, volume, SMI, Thickness and canal curvature were significantly increased after preparation in both groups, and no significant difference was found between groups. At apical third, canals prepared with WO showed larger values of transportation compared with those in PTN group in the direction of main curvature. Approximately 29–34% of the root canal surface remained uninstrumented after preparation and no significant difference was noticed between groups.

Conclusion

Both of the two instrument systems maintained the original outline of the canals well. The canals prepared with PTN had less transportation and were better centered in the apical region.