Comparison of apical debris extrusion of two rotary systems and one reciprocating system

Comparative Evaluation of Extrusion of Apical Debris in Primary Maxillary Anterior Teeth Using Two Different Rotary Systems and Hand Files: An In Vitro Study

Successful outcome of pulp therapy depends on good chemomechanical preparation of the canals. This is completed with the help of various upcoming rotary and hand files. However, during this preparation, there might be an apical extrusion of the debris which may result in postoperative complications. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the number of debris apically extruded during canal preparation using two different pediatric rotary file systems and conventional hand file systems in primary teeth. 60 primary maxillary central incisors that were extracted due to trauma or untreated dental caries with no signs of resorption were taken. Canal preparation was executed using three different file systems: Group A: Group A hand K file system, Group B Kedo S Plus, Group C Kedo SG Blue. For each of these files using the Myers and Montgomery model, the pre- and post-weight of the eppendorf tube was assessed to quantify the number of apical debris. The maximum extrusion of apical debris was noticed with the Hand K-file system. The least debris was noticed in the Kedo S Plus file system. Statistical analysis revealed that there were highly significant differences in apical extrusion and debris when comparing hand files and rotary files and also between the two rotary files used. Apical debris collection is an unavoidable outcome of canal instrumentation. Among the file systems compared, rotary files had lesser extrusion when compared to hand files. Among the rotary files, Kedo S plus showed normal extrusion compared to SG Blue.

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.

Apically Extruded Debris following Programmed Over Instrumentation of Curved Canals with Three Nickel Titanium Rotary Instruments

OBJECTIVES

 This in vitro study aimed to compare the amount of mixed and dried debris extruded with three endodontic NiTi (nickel-titanium) systems at three levels beyond the major apical foramen. The null hypothesis is that there would be no differences between the different rotary systems in terms of apically extruded debris.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

 Forty-eight roots of human extracted molars with 20 to 40-degrees curvature were divided randomly into three groups (n = 16) instrumented with ProTaper Next, BT RaCe, and WaveOne Gold, respectively. Instrumentation was performed at the major foramen and over instrumented 0.5 mm, 1.0 mm and 1.5 mm beyond. Irrigation was performed with sodium hypochlorite. Apically extruded debris was collected.

RESULTS

 Comparison of mixed extruded debris (solution/debris)and dried debris according to group and level of instrumentation showed that WaveOne Gold at the foramen and ProTaper Next beyond the foramen (p < 0.0001) resulted in significantly less extruded debris than other files and within the four levels using repeated measures analysis of variance (p < 0.0001b).

CONCLUSIONS

 All systems exhibit extruded debris during instrumentation but in different amounts.

Clinical impact of bisphosphonates in root canal therapy

Bisphosphonates are stable structural analogs of pyrophosphate, which suppress the activity of osteoclasts, leading to decreased bone resorption. They are essential medications in the treatment of osteoporosis. Osteonecrosis of the jaw is a serious adverse effect of bisphosphonate therapy. The prevalence of bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw varies from 0% to 28%, and it can be triggered by dental extraction and trauma. Root canal therapy can delay, or even eliminate, the need for tooth extraction, and therefore, may reduce the risk of bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw. We suggest that this might be the best treatment for teeth with pulpal and/or periapical disease.

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.

Comparison of Shaping Ability of 10 Rotary and Reciprocating Systems: an In Vitro Study with AutoCad

Objective

The aim of this study was to compare the cutting are, root canal anatomy preservation and non-instrumented areas of F360®, F6-SkyTaper®, Hyflex-EDM®, iRACE®, Neoniti®, O.Shape®, P.Next®, Reciproc®, Revo-S® and Wave-One-Gold® size 25 files.

Materials and Methods

300 teeth with a single straight root and a circular or elliptical root canal were divided into 10 groups (1-F360®, 2- F6-SkyTaper®, 3-Hyflex-EDM®, 4-iRACE®, 5-Neoniti®, 6-O.Shape®, 7-P.Next®, 8-Reciproc®, 9-Revo-S® and 10-Wave-One-Gold®) cut into 3 cross sections using an ultrafine cutting disc. They were photographed under a stereo microscope and preinstrumentation analyses were made before rebuilding the teeth with# 10 K- File and epoxy glue. A glide path was created with #10 and #15 K files and each group was instrumented using rotary or reciprocating systems. Cutting areas, root canal anatomy preservation and non-instrumented areas were analyzed using the AutoCAD 2015 Levene's test, the Welch´s test, and the Games-Howell´s test. The Pearson’s chi-squared test was used for statistical analysis.

Results

Levene's test showed no equality of variances (P<0.05), therefore Welch´s and Games-Howell's tests were applied to cutting areas, showing significant differences in all thirds and overall (P<0.05). No differences in root canal anatomy preservation were observed (P>0.05). In non-instrumented areas, significant differences were found (P<0.05) in middle third being better in Reciproc®, Neoniti® and WaveOneGold®, and in apical thirds being higher P.Next®, Reciproc®, HyflexEDM®, Neoniti® and WaveOneGold®.

Conclusions

In cutting area, P.Next® and Reciproc® were superior in coronal third, Neoniti® and Hyflex EDM® medially and apically and Neoniti® and Reciproc® overall. Regarding the root canal anatomy preservation, all systems were similar. For non-instrumented areas, all systems achieved similar results coronally, but Reciproc®, Neoniti® and Wave One Gold® were superior in middle third and P.Next®, Reciproc®, Hyflex EDM®, Neoniti® and Wave One Gold® were superior in apically.

Effect of three different rotary instrumentation systems on postinstrumentation pain: A randomized clinical trial

Background:

Endodontic instrumentation is liable to cause some postinstrumentation pain (PIP). Rotary endodontic instruments differ in their design, metallurgy, surface treatment, etc.

Aim:

This randomized clinical trial aimed to assess the incidence of PIP after root canal instrumentation with three different rotary endodontic systems which differ in their design, namely, ProTaper, Mtwo, and K3.

Materials and Methods:

A total of 150 patients between the ages of 25 and 50 were chosen for the study. Teeth with asymptomatic irreversible pulpitis due to carious exposure were selected. The patients received local anesthesia by inferior alveolar nerve block. After preparing the access cavity, root canal instrumentation was done with one of the three instruments (n = 50) and closed dressing was given. PIP was assessed every 12 h for 5 days, and tenderness to percussion was analyzed at the end of 1, 3, and 7 days.

Statistical Analysis:

Mann–Whitney U-test to determine significant differences at P < 0.01.

Results:

The PIP and tenderness were less in Mtwo group when compared to ProTaper and K3 groups up to 84 h and 72 h respectively and statistically significant (P < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between ProTaper and K3 both in PIP and tenderness.

Conclusion:

Rotary endodontic instrumentation causes some degree of PIP and tenderness to percussion. Among the instruments used, Mtwo causes less PIP and tenderness when compared to ProTaper and K3, and there was no difference between ProTaper and K3.

Clinical Relevance:

PIP is highly subjective and may vary among different subjects. The apical (3 mm) taper of ProTaper was 0.08 followed by a smaller taper, whereas, the other two files were of a constant 0.06 taper, which means there could have been a greater apical extrusion and therefore more PIP. Despite, the mean of the age was similar, there could have been a difference in the size of the canal and therefore a difference in apical extrusion and PIP.