Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Eur J Dent 2019; 13(04): 613-618
DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-3399407
Original Article
Dental Investigation Society

Apical Transportation and Centering Ability After Root Canal Filling Removal Using Reciprocating and Continuous Rotary Systems: A CBCT Study

Etienny da Silva Arruda
1   School of Dentistry, Federal University of Amazonas, Manaus, Amazonas, Brazil
,
Emílio Carlos Sponchiado-Júnior
1   School of Dentistry, Federal University of Amazonas, Manaus, Amazonas, Brazil
,
Mariana Travi Pandolfo
2   Department of Dentistry, Endodontics Division, Health Sciences Center, Federal University of Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, Santa Catarina, Brazil
,
Márcio Acris de Carvalho Fredson
3   Superior School of Health Sciences, State University of Amazonas, Manaus, Amazonas, Brazil
,
Lucas da Fonseca Roberi Garcia
2   Department of Dentistry, Endodontics Division, Health Sciences Center, Federal University of Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, Santa Catarina, Brazil
,
André Augusto Franco Marques
3   Superior School of Health Sciences, State University of Amazonas, Manaus, Amazonas, Brazil
› Author Affiliations Funding The authors would like to thank the “Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Amazonas–FAPEAM” (Process Nº 062.00649/2015) for the financial support.
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
31 December 2019 (online)

   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the apical transportation and centering ability promoted by reciprocating and continuous rotary systems after root canal filling removal.

Materials and Methods After obturation, 40 mesial root canals of mandibular molars were distributed into four groups (n = 20) for filling material removal: PTU group–F2 instrument (25.08) of ProTaper Universal system; R25 group–R25 instrument (25.08) of Reciproc system; X2 group–X2 instrument (25.06) of ProTaper Next system and X3 group–X2 instrument (25.06) of ProTaper Next system, followed by X3 instrument (30.07). Cone-beam computed tomographic analysis was performed before and after filling material removal for acquisition of apical images. Apical transportation (AT) and its direction, and centering ability (CA), were assessed using the equations AT = (X1–X2)–(Y1–Y2) and CA = (X1–X2/Y1–Y2 or Y1–Y2/X1–X2), respectively. Data were submitted to the nonparametric Kruskal–Wallis and Dunn multiple comparison tests (p < 0.05) for statistical analysis.

Results There was no statistically significant difference among groups for AT (p > 0.05), with a tendency toward transportation in the distal direction. Also, there was no statistically significant difference among groups regarding CA (p > 0.05).

Conclusions The different systems, including ProTaper Next, caused AT within the acceptable clinical limit after filling removal. In addition, none of the tested systems presented adequate CA.

Keywords

Apical transportation - centering ability - rotary systems - reciprocating motion
 

  • References

  • 1 Shen Y, Zhou HM, Zheng YF, Peng B, Haapasalo M. Current challenges and concepts of the thermomechanical treatment of nickel-titanium instruments. J Endod 2013; 39 (02) 163-172
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Costa EL, Sponchiado-Júnior EC, Garcia LFR, Marques AA. Effect of large instrument use on shaping ability and debris extrusion of rotary and reciprocating systems. J Investig Clin Dent 2018; 9 (01) e12289
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Zuolo AS, Mello Jr JE, Cunha RS, Zuolo ML, Bueno CE. Efficacy of reciprocating and rotary techniques for removing filling material during root canal retreatment. Int Endod J 2013; 46 (10) 947-953
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Üstün Y, Topçuoğlu HS, Düzgün S, Kesim B. The effect of reciprocation versus rotational movement on the incidence of root defects during retreatment procedures. Int Endod J 2015; 48 (10) 952-958
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Nevares G, de Albuquerque DS, Freire LG. et al. Efficacy of ProTaper NEXT compared with Reciproc in removing obturation material from severely curved root canals: a micro-computed tomography study. J Endod 2016; 42 (05) 803-808
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 de Carvalho GM, Sponchiado Junior EC, Garrido AD, Lia RC, Garcia LdaF, Marques AA, Garcia L daF, Marques AA. Apical transportation, centering ability, and cleaning effectiveness of reciprocating single-file system associated with different glide path techniques. J Endod 2015; 41 (12) 2045-2049
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 da Frota MF, Espir CG, Berbert FL. et al. Comparison of cyclic fatigue and torsional resistance in reciprocating single-file systems and continuous rotary instrumentation systems. J Oral Sci 2014; 56 (04) 269-275
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Fruchi LdeC, Ordinola-Zapata R, Cavenago BC. Hungaro Duarte MA, Bueno CE, De Martin AS. Efficacy of reciprocating instruments for removing filling material in curved canals obturated with a single-cone technique: a micro-computed tomographic analysis. J Endod 2014; 40 (07) 1000-1004
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Rios MdeA, Villela AM, Cunha RS. et al. Efficacy of 2 reciprocating systems compared with a rotary retreatment system for gutta-percha removal. J Endod 2014; 40 (04) 543-546
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 de Souza PF, Goncalves LCO, Marques AA, Junior ECS, Garcia LDFR, de Carvalho FMA. Root canal retreatment using reciprocating and continuous rotary nickel-titanium instruments. Eur J Dent 2015; 9 (02) 234-239
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Wu H, Peng C, Bai Y, Hu X, Wang L, Li C. Shaping ability of ProTaper Universal, WaveOne and ProTaper Next in simulated L-shaped and S-shaped root canals. BMC Oral Health 2015; 15: 27
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Zhao D, Shen Y, Peng B, Haapasalo M. Root canal preparation of mandibular molars with 3 nickel-titanium rotary instruments: a micro-computed tomographic study. J Endod 2014; 40 (11) 1860-1864
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Yılmaz K, Özyürek T. Apically extruded debris after retreatment procedure with Reciproc, ProTaper Next, and Twisted File Adaptive instruments. J Endod 2017; 43 (04) 648-651
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Martins MP, Duarte MA, Cavenago BC. Kato AS, da Silveira Bueno CE. Effectiveness of the ProTaper Next and Reciproc systems in removing root canal filling material with sonic or ultrasonic irrigation: A micro-computed tomographic study. J Endod 2017; 43 (03) 467-471
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Silva EJ, Orlowsky NB, Herrera DR, Machado R, Krebs RL, Coutinho-Filho TdeS. Effectiveness of rotatory and reciprocating movements in root canal filling material removal. Braz Oral Res 2015; 29: 1-6
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Özyürek T, Demiryürek EÖ. Efficacy of different nickel-titanium instruments in removing gutta-percha during root canal retreatment. J Endod 2016; 42 (04) 646-649
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Schneider SW. A comparison of canal preparations in straight and curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1971; 32 (02) 271-275
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Pruett JP, Clement DJ, Carnes DL Jr. Cyclic fatigue testing of nickel-titanium endodontic instruments. J Endod 1997; 23 (02) 77-85
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Gambill JM, Alder M, del Rio CE. Comparison of nickel-titanium and stainless steel hand-file instrumentation using computed tomography. J Endod 1996; 22 (07) 369-375
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 D’Amario M, Baldi M, Petricca R, De Angelis F, El Abed R, D’Arcangelo C. Evaluation of a new nickel-titanium system to create the glide path in root canal preparation of curved canals. J Endod 2013; 39 (12) 1581-1584
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Gergi R, Osta N, Bourbouze G. Zgheib C, Arbab-Chirani R, Naaman A. Effects of three nickel titanium instrument systems on root canal geometry assessed by micro-computed tomography. Int Endod J 2015; 48 (02) 162-170
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Gagliardi J, Versiani MA, de Sousa-Neto MD, Plazas-Garzon A, Basrani B. Evaluation of the shaping characteristics of ProTaper Gold, ProTaper NEXT, and ProTaper Universal in curved canals. J Endod 2015; 41 (10) 1718-1724
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Zanesco C, Só MV, Schmidt S, Fontanella VR, Grazziotin-Soares R, Barletta FB. Apical transportation, centering ratio, and volume increase after manual, rotary, and reciprocating instrumentation in curved root canals: analysis by micro-computed tomographic and digital subtraction radiography. J Endod 2017; 43 (03) 486-490
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Elnaghy AM, Al-Dharrab AA, Abbas HM. Elsaka SE. Evaluation of root canal transportation, centering ratio, and remaining dentin thickness of TRUShape and ProTaper Next systems in curved root canals using micro-computed tomography. Quintessence Int 2017; 48 (01) 27-32
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Fan B, Wu MK, Wesselink PR. Leakage along warm gutta-percha fillings in the apical canals of curved roots. Endod Dent Traumatol 2000; 16 (01) 29-33
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Agrafioti A, Koursoumis AD, Kontakiotis EG. Re-establishing apical patency after obturation with Gutta-percha and two novel calcium silicate-based sealers. Eur J Dent 2015; 9 (04) 457-461
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Gorduysus MO, Al-Rubai H, Salman B. Al Saady D, Al-Dagistani H, Muftuoglu S. Using erbium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet laser irradiation in different energy output levels versus ultrasonic in removal of root canal filling materials in endodontic retreatment. Eur J Dent 2017; 11 (03) 281-286
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar