Cleaning Effectiveness of a Reciprocating Single-file and a Conventional Rotary Instrumentation System

Comparative evaluation of cleaning efficiency of single file NiTi rotary system during root canal treatment procedure - A scanning electron microscope study

Background

Optimal biomechanical preparation, thorough irrigation, proper disinfection, and finally, well-sealed obturation is a must to attain definitive success in root canal procedure. Proper preparation of the root canal is all the more imperative to establish a hermetic apical seal with adequately placed filling materials. The present study was conducted for comparing the Cleaning Efficiency of F360 system and the WaveOne Gold (WOG) system of rotary NiTi instrumentation for a root canal.

Materials and Methods

One hundred freshly extracted noncarious mandibular canines were obtained. Access cavity of standard size was made followed by the establishment of working length. Afterward, random division of all the specimens was done into two study groups: group A: the group in which F360 system was used for instrumentation and group B: the group in which the WOG system was used for instrumentation. Irrigations of all the specimens of both the study groups were done followed by root canal shaping by the instrument system of their respective study groups. Scanning electron microscope (SEM) was used for assessment after specimens were cut buccolingually. Debris score and residual smear layer score were used for assessment.

Results

Among group A specimens, the mean smear layer score at the coronal third, middle third, and apical third was 1.76, 2.39, and 2.65, respectively. Among group B specimens, the mean smear layer score at the coronal third, middle third, and apical third was 1.34, 1.59, and 1.92, respectively. While analyzing statistically, it was seen that the mean smear layer score was significantly higher among specimens of group A in comparison to group B. While analyzing statistically, it was seen that the mean debris score was significantly higher among specimens of group A in comparison to group B.

Conclusion

The cleaning effectiveness of WOG instruments was significantly enhanced in comparison to F360 equipment.

Comparison of Cleaning Efficiency of Root Canal Using Different Rotary NiTi Instrumentation System: A Scanning Electron Microscopic Study

Background: To ensure that endodontic treatment is as effective as possible, it is important to remove any smear layer that forms as part of the instrumentation procedure. This layer might reduce the overall effectiveness of endodontic therapy.

Aim of the study: For this research, two distinct types of rotary NiTi files were compared: WaveOne Gold (WOG) (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland) and F360 (Komet Brasseler GmbH & Co., Lemgo, Germany) for its capacity to eliminate trash and the smear layer.

Materials and methods: Two groups (n=20 each) of 40 mandibular second premolar teeth were employed in this investigation, with each group receiving a random allocation of teeth. The F360 system and the WaveOne Gold system are two sets of instruments. The samples were irrigated with a mixture of sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) (5.25%) and citric acid (40%). Finally, all samples in the centre of the coronal, middle, and apical thirds were examined by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Mann-Whitney U tests were used to analyse the data.

Results: F360 instrument showed a statistically significant difference for smear layer removal among all thirds of the root canal whereas WOG resulted in a significant difference when the apical third was compared to the middle and coronal third. Significant differences were found in the middle and apical third in terms of smear layer removal between the two groups.

Both F360 and WOG instruments showed statistically significant differences for debris removal among all thirds of the root canal. No significant differences were found in the coronal, middle, and apical third in terms of debris removal between the two groups.

Conclusion: WOG resulted in cleaner canals compared to the F360 file system at coronal, middle, and apical third.

A single-file endodontic treatment: A promising endodontic concept

nema

Comparison of cleaning effectiveness of single rotary file OneShape and reciprocating F2 Protaper with Protaper Universal sequence: A SEM analysis

Aim

This in vitro study intend to compare the cleaning effectiveness of Protaper universal sequence with reciprocating F2 Protaper and single rotary file One shape.

Materials and method

30 extracted human 1st mandibular molars were chosen for the analysis. Three NiTi file systems were used for mechanical preparation, ProTaper full sequence in rotary motion, single F2 Protaper file used in reciprocating motion, and One shape single file used in a circular motion. Irrigation was carried out after each instrument use using 5 ml of 5% NaOCl followed by normal saline. The root canal surface was evaluated at three different areas (coronal, middle and apical thirds) using Scanning Electron Microscopy. Debris and the Smear layer were evaluated. Data were analyzed statistically using the Friedman test and Kruskal-Wallis test (p ≤ 0.05).

Results

A statistically significant difference (p ≤ 0.05) was observed in the debris score of the Protaper universal group when the 3 thirds of the root were compared. Intergroup comparisons confirmed a statistically significant difference at the coronal and apical third of the roots when debris scores were evaluated. Intragroup comparison for the smear layer demonstrated a statistically significant difference (p ≤ 0.05) at all the 3 levels of the radicular canal for the 3 groups studied. Intergroup comparisons revealed a statistically significant difference (p ≤ 0.05) in the middle and apical 1/3rd when the smear layer was evaluated.

Conclusion

The Protaper full sequence group provided better results than Single F2 ProTaper and One shape groups when debris and smear layer removal was investigated.