Comparison of apically extruded debris associated with several nickel-titanium systems after determining working length by apex locator

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.

Comparison of single and multiple file rotary endodontic instruments for debris and irrigant extrusion: An in vitro study

Aim

The aim of this study was to assess and compare the quantity of apically debris which was extruded apically by TruNatomy (TN), ProTaper Next (PTN), HyFlex electric discharge machining (EDM), and HyFlex controlled memory (CM), following root canal preparation.

Materials and Methods

Sixty extracted single-canal mandibular premolars were used. The root canal preparation was done with TN, HyFlex EDM, PTN, or HyFlex CM files. The preweight debris, which was extruded apically, was collected in the Eppendorf tube and later on incubated at 670°C for 3 days and weighed again to record the extruded debris.

Results

The result showed that there was a significant reduction in debris extrusion by TN system, followed by PTN system, HyFlex EDM, and maximum extrusion in HyFlex CM (P < 0.05). Between the PTN and TN groups as well as between the HyFlex EDM and HyFlex CM groups, statistically significant difference was not observed (P > 0.05).

Conclusion

Apical debris extrusion is the inherent nature of the all file systems. Nevertheless, the TN file system produced substantially minimum debris extrusion among other systems compared in the study.

Effect of mode of rotation on apical extrusion of debris with four different single-file endodontic instrumentation systems: Systematic review and meta-analysis

This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated whether single-file endodontic instrumentation systems with the reciprocating type of motion are responsible for more debris extrusion than single-file endodontic instrumentation systems with the full rotational type of motion. Electronic and manual searches were performed following the recommendations of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis - PRISMA. We included studies comparing rotary (Neoniti and/ OneShape) versus reciprocating (WaveOne and/ Reciproc) systems. We evaluated the quality of studies and performed statistical analysis using R-Project software. Eight studies of high quality were included to perform the meta-analysis. Subgroup analysis was also done. The overall risk of bias was too low. In conclusion, single-file reciprocating systems tend to generate more extrusion of debris than single-file rotary systems.

The influence of ProTaper and WaveOne on apically extruded debris: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background:

Apically extruded debris produced during root canal preparation can induce postoperative inflammation and subsequent failure of root canal treatment. Therefore, debris production must be reduced to improve the outcome of root canal treatment.

Aim:

This study aimed to provide a theoretical basis for the improvement of root canal treatment by comparing the difference in the amount of apically extruded debris produced during the root canal preparation of extracted human teeth with ProTaper Universal (PTU), ProTaper Next (PTN), and WaveOne (WO).

Materials and Methods:

On March 30, 2017, three researchers searched five electronic databases (PubMed/Medline, Cochrane, Science Direct Online, Embase, and Web of Science) with no time limitations. Only articles written in English were retrieved, and 150 articles were obtained. Then, the three researchers independently selected articles in accordance with previously established inclusion and exclusion criteria, and inconsistent results were discussed. Data were analyzed through meta-analysis for standardized mean difference (SMD).

Results:

Eight studies met the inclusion criteria and were subjected to qualitative analysis. Four articles showed that PTU produced higher amounts of apical debris than WO; two articles showed that PTU produced lower amounts of apical debris than WO; and three articles showed that PTN produced lower amounts of apical debris than WO. Moreover, one article demonstrated that PTU produced higher amounts of apical debris than PTN. A meta-analysis showed that PTU and WO did not produce significantly different amounts of apically extruded debris: SMD = −0.26, Z = 0.50 (P > 0.05). PTU produced lower amounts of apically extruded debris than WO: SMD = −4.98, Z = 2.79 (P < 0.05). However, results were significantly heterogeneous among all the included studies (I²= 97%). No significant difference was found between PTU and WO in the amounts of apically extruded debris: SMD = 0.47, Z = 1.06 (P > 0.05).

Conclusion:

Currently available evidence shows that PTN can produce lower amounts of apical debris than WO (P < 0.05). Moreover, the amounts of apically extruded debris produced by PTU and WO are not significantly different (P > 0.05). Nevertheless, given the limited number of studies reviewed, a definitive conclusion cannot be reached.

Effect of large instrument use on shaping ability and debris extrusion of rotary and reciprocating systems

AIM

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effect of large instrument use on the shaping ability and apical debris extrusion of rotary and reciprocating systems in oval-shaped root canals.

METHODS

Forty-five mandibular premolars, with an 18-mm long, oval-shaped single canal, and apical diameter ranging from 300 to 350 μm, were separated into three groups (n=15), according to the system used: ProTaper Universal group, F5 (0.50/0.05); ProTaper Next (PTN group), X5 (0.50/0.06); and Reciproc (RC group), R50 (0.50/0.05). Cone-beam computed tomography was performed before and after preparation to analyze apical transportation (AT), centering ability (CA), and change in root canal diameter (CRCD). For evaluating apical debris extrusion, the roots were coupled to pre-weighed glass receptacles to collect the extruded debris during preparation.

RESULTS

All systems promoted AT and apical debris extrusion; the latter was higher for the PTN group (P<.05). No system presented perfect CA. The RC group demonstrated the largest CRCD (P<.05).

CONCLUSIONS

As consequences of their use, the large instruments promoted undesirable AT and debris extrusion, irrespective of the system used to perform root canal preparation. Moreover, no system was able to remain perfectly centralized within the root canal.