sdj-10081

Analysis of Apical Transportation and Canal Centering Ability During Root Canal Preparation by Using Cone-Beam Computed Tomography (in Vitro Study)

*Khelan M. Amin, **Bestoon M. Faraj

*Institution: Department of Conservative dentistry, College of Dentistry, University of Sulaimani, Sulaimani, Iraq.

**Department of Conservative dentistry, College of Dentistry, University of Sulaimani, Sulaimani, Iraq.

Submitted: 18/12/2018; Accepted: 30/12/2018; Published 31/12/2018

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17656/sdj.10081

Abstract

Objective: One of the goals of root canal preparation is to clean and shape the root canal system while maintaining the original configuration. So, it is essential to keep the instruments centered on providing a correct enlargement, Canal transportation is a common sequel caused by instrumentation, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the canal shaping efficacy of WaveOne® Gold, NiTiflex, and a stainless-steel K-files by CBCT.

Methods: Sixty extracted curved single root premolars were selected, from Shorsh dental center and private clinic and divided into three equal groups. Before preparation, all samples numbered and scanned by CBCT. Then, the first group (n=20) were prepared with WaveOne Gold rotary file, the second group (n=20) were prepared by NiTiFlex hand file, and the third group (n= 20) were prepared by stainless steel files. Canal transportation and centering ability before and after root canal shaping assessed using CBCT and Adobe Photoshop CS3 Extended. The amount and direction of canal transportation in the apical third of each instrument determined in three axial sections of 2mm, 3mm, and 4mm from the apex, while the centering ability of each instrument determined in 5 axial sections of 2mm, 4mm, 6mm, 8mm, and 10mm from the apex. The three groups were statistically compared using one way ANOVA test.

Results: It was reviled that there were no statistically significant differences in the magnitude of canal transportation between three groups (p > 0.05) at 2 mm, 3 mm as well as 4 mm from the apex, while in group one (WaveOne Gold) showed significantly lower mean canal transportation as compared to other two groups. The centering ability was statistically significant in 2 mm axial section, WaveOne Gold had better-centering ability than NiTiFlex and Stainless steel hand file. While in other sections the difference was nonsignificant.

Conclusions: The difference between the three groups was non-significant regarding transportation, while in apical part WaveOne Gold has better-centering ability than the other two groups.

Keywords: Apical transportation, Centering ability, CBCT, Waveone gold.

Full Article - PDF

References:

1. Mahran AH, AboEl-Fotouh MM. Comparison of effects of ProTaper, HeroShaper, and Gates Glidden burs on cervical dentin thickness and root canal volume by using multislice computed tomography. J Endod. 2008;34(10):1219-22.

2. Zhang L, Luo H-x, Zhou X-d, Tan H, Huang D-m. The shaping effect of the combination of two rotary nickel-titanium instruments in simulated Sshaped canals. J Endod. 2008;34(4):456-8.

3. Abou-Rass M, Frank AL, Glick DH. The anticurvature filing method to prepare the curved root canal. J. Am. Dent. Assoc (1939). 1980;101(5):792-4.

4. Walia H, Brantley WA, Gerstein H. An initial investigation of the bending and torsional properties of Nitinol root canal files. J Endod. 1988;14(7):346-51.

5. Sonntag D, Delschen S, Stachniss V. Root‐canal shaping with manual and rotary Ni‐Ti files performed by students. Int Endod J. 2003;36(11):715-23.

6. Ye J, Gao Y. Metallurgical characterization of MWire nickel-titanium shape memory alloy used for endodontic rotary instruments during low-cycle fatigue. J Endod. 2012;38(1):105-7.

7. Webber J. Shaping canals with confidence: WaveOne GOLD single-file reciprocating system. Inte Dent. 2015;6(3):6-17.

8. Esposito PT, Cunningham CJ. A comparison of canal preparation with nickel-titanium and stainless steel instruments. J Endod. 1995;21(4):173-6.

9. Alencar AHGd, Dummer PM, Oliveira HCM, Pécora JD, Estrela C. Procedural errors during root canal preparation using rotary NiTi instruments detected by periapical radiography and cone beam computed tomography. Braz Dent J. 2010;21(6):543-9.

10. Gergi R, Arbab-Chirani R, Osta N, Naaman A. Micro-Computed Tomographic Evaluation of Canal Transportation Instrumented by Different Kinematics Rotary Nickel-Titanium Instruments. J Endod. 2014;40(8):1223-7.

11. Schneider SW. A comparison of canal preparations in straight and curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1971;32(2):271-5.

12. Flores CB, Machado P, Montagner F, Gomes BPFdA, Dotto GN, Schmitz MDS. A methodology to standardize the evaluation of root canal instrumentation using cone beam computed tomography. Braz J Oral Sci. 2012;11(2):84-7.

13. Baumgartner JC, Ingle JI, Bakland LK. Ingle's Endodontics. 6th ed. Hamilton: BC Decker Inc; 2008. 938.

14. Castellucci A. Schilder’s technique for shaping the root canal system. Endodontics. 2005;1:438-69.

15. Gambill JM, Alder M, Carlos E. Comparison of nickel-titanium and stainless steel hand-file instrumentation using computed tomography. J Endod. 1996;22(7):369-75.

16. Gergi R, Rjeily JA, Sader J, Naaman A. Comparison of canal transportation and centering ability of twisted files, Pathfile-ProTaper system, and stainless steel hand K-files by using computed tomography. J Endod. 2010;36(5):904-7.

17. Jardine S, Gulabivala K. An in vitro comparison of canal preparation using two automated rotary nickel–titanium instrumentation techniques. Int Endod J. 2000;33(4):381-91.

18. Song Y, Bian Z, Fan B, Fan M, Gutmann J, Peng B. A comparison of instrument‐centering ability within the root canal for three contemporary instrumentation techniques. Int Endod J. 2004;37(4):265-71.

19. Vincenzi V, Plotino G, Giansiracusa A, Pietrangeli E, Al Sudani D, Grande NM, et al. A SEM study of canal cleanliness after a new nickel-titanium rotary instrumentation technique. Ann Stomatol. 2011;2(1-2):19.

20. Madani Zs, Goudarzipor D, Haddadi A, Saeidi A, Bijani A. A CBCT Assessment of apical transportation in root canals prepared with hand kflexofile and K3 rotary instruments. Iran Endod J. 2015;10(1):44.

21. Moore J, Fitz‐Walter P, Parashos P. A microcomputed tomographic evaluation of apical root canal preparation using three instrumentation techniques. Int Endod J. 2009;42(12):1057-64.

22. Hartmann MSM, Barletta FB, Fontanella VRC, Vanni JR. Canal transportation after root canal instrumentation: a comparative study with computed tomography. J Endod. 2007;33(8):9625.

23. Eleazer P, Glickman G, McClanahan S, Webb T, Jusrman B. Glossary of Endodontic Terms. 9th edition. Chicago: American Association of Endodontists; 2016;47.

24. Peters OA. Current challenges and concepts in the preparation of root canal systems: a review. J Endod. 2004;30(8):559-67.

25. Siqueira Jr JF, Rôças IN, Favieri A, Machado AG, Gahyva SM, Oliveira JC, et al. Incidence of postoperative pain after intracanal procedures based on an antimicrobial strategy. J Endod. 2002;28(6):457-60.

26. Ehsani M, Zahedpasha S, Moghadamnia AA, Mirjani J. An ex-vivo study on the shaping parameters of two nickel-titanium rotary systems compared with hand instruments. Iran Endod J. 2011;6(2):74.

27. Pereira E, Peixoto I, Viana A, Oliveira I, Gonzalez B, Buono V, et al. Physical and mechanical properties of a thermomechanically treated NiTi wire used in the manufacture of rotary endodontic instruments. Int Endod J. 2012;45(5):469-74.

28. You S-Y, Kim H-C, Bae K-S, Baek S-H, Kum KY, Lee W. Shaping ability of reciprocating motion in curved root canals: a comparative study with micro–computed tomography. J Endod. 2011;37(9):1296-300.

29. Franco V, Fabiani C, Taschieri S, Malentacca A, Bortolin M, Del Fabbro M. Investigation on the shaping ability of nickel-titanium files when used with a reciprocating motion. J Endod. 2011;37(10):1398-401.

30. Wu M-K, Fan B, Wesselink PR. Leakage along apical root fillings in curved root canals. Part I: effects of apical transportation on seal of root fillings. J Endod. 2000;26(4):210-6.

31. Calhoun G, Montgomery S. The effects of four instrumentation techniques on root canal shape. J Endod. 1988;14(6):273-7.

32. Kim HC, Hwang YJ, Jung DW, You SY, Kim HC, Lee W. Micro‐Computed Tomography and Scanning Electron Microscopy Comparisons of Two Nickel–Titanium Rotary Root Canal Instruments Used With Reciprocating Motion. Scanning. 2013;35(2):112-8.

33. Nagaraja S, Murthy BS. CT evaluation of canal preparation using rotary and hand NI-TI instruments: An in vitro study. J Conserv Dent. 2010;13(1):16.

34. Parvathaneni KP, Goel BR, Parvathaneni BD. A comparison of root canal preparations using stainless steel, Ni-Ti hand, and Ni-Ti enginedriven endodontic instruments an in vitro study. Bangladesh J. Med. Sci. 2010;9(4):223-30.

35. Short JA, Morgan LA, Baumgartner JC. A comparison of canal centering ability of four instrumentation techniques. J Endod. 1997;23(8):503-7.

36. Schafer E, Florek H. Efficiency of rotary nickeltitanium K3 instruments compared with stainless steel hand K-Flexofile. Part 1. Shaping ability in simulated curved canals. Int Endontic J. 2003;36(3):199-207.

37. Kandaswamy D, Venkateshbabu N, Porkodi I, Pradeep G. Canal-centering ability: An endodontic challenge. J Conserv Dent. 2009;12(1):3.

38. Carvalho LAP, Bonetti I, Borges MAG. A comparison of molar root canal preparation using stainless-steel and Nickel-Titanium instruments. J Endod. 1999;25(12):807-10.

39. Barbosa-Ribeiro M, Albergaria SJ, Malvar MdFG, Crusoé-Rebello IM, Gomes BPFdA, Carvalho FBd. Canal transportation and centering ability of curved root canals prepared using rotary and reciprocating systems. Braz J Oral Sci. 2015;14(3):214-8.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.