Journal of South Asian Association of Pediatric Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 4 , ISSUE 1 ( January-June, 2021 ) > List of Articles


Digital Radiographic Evaluation of Primary Molar Obturation Following Use of Lentulo Spiral and Endodontic Pressure Syringe in Root Canals Prepared with Rotary Ni-Ti Files and Manual Files: An In Vivo Study

Priya Subramaniam, Usha D Chandolu, Megha Gupta

Citation Information : Subramaniam P, Chandolu UD, Gupta M. Digital Radiographic Evaluation of Primary Molar Obturation Following Use of Lentulo Spiral and Endodontic Pressure Syringe in Root Canals Prepared with Rotary Ni-Ti Files and Manual Files: An In Vivo Study. J South Asian Assoc Pediatr Dent 2021; 4 (1):9-15.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10077-3065

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 01-06-2021

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2021; The Author(s).


Aim and objective: The study aimed to evaluate and compare the quality of obturation in root canals of primary molars using two methods of obturation (lentulo spiral, endodontic pressure syringe), following preparation with either rotary nickel-titanium files or manual nickel-titanium files. Materials and methods: A total of 100 primary molars from children aged 5–9 years were divided into 2 groups; consisting of 50 teeth each. In group I and group II, cleaning and shaping of root canals were done using rotary files and manual Ni-Ti files, respectively. Each group was further subdivided into 2 subgroups comprising 25 teeth each and obturated with zinc oxide eugenol, using either endodontic pressure syringe or lentulo spiral. The quality of obturation was evaluated using digital radiographs, for the length of obturation, presence, and location of voids. Data obtained were subjected to statistical analysis using Student's t-test, Chi-square test, and one-way ANOVA. Results: Rotary preparation of canals with obturation using an endodontic pressure syringe resulted in fewer voids. With manual files, overfilling of canals was comparable with both techniques of obturation. More number of voids were seen in canals obturated using the lentulo spiral technique. Conclusion: Rotary preparation of root canals followed by endodontic pressure syringe obturation gave more dense, uniform, and optimal filling than canals obturated with lentulo spiral files.

  1. Silva ABL, Leonardo MR, Filho NP, et al. Comparison of rotary and manual instrumentation techniques on cleaning capacity and instrumentation time in deciduous molars. J Dent Child 2004;71:45–47.
  2. Barr ES, Kleier DJ, Barr NV. Use of nickel-titanium rotary files for root canal preparation in primary teeth. Pediatr Dent 1999;21(7):453–454.
  3. Moghaddam KN, Mehran M, Zadeh HF. Root canal cleaning efficacy of rotary and hand files instrumentation in primary molars. Iran Endod J 2009;4(2):53–57.
  4. Bahrololoomi, Tabrizazadeh M, Salmani L. In vitro comparison of instrumentation time and cleaning capacity between rotary and manual preparation techniques in primary teeth. J Dent 2007;4(2):59–62.
  5. Nagaratna PJ, Shashikiran ND, Subbareddy VV. In vitro comparison of NiTi rotary instruments and stainless-steel hand instruments in root canal preparations of primary and permanent molar. J Ind Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2006(4):186–191. DOI: 10.4103/0970-4388.28075.
  6. Bawazir OA, Salama FS. Clinical evaluation of root canal obturation methods in primary teeth. Pediatr Dent 2006;28:39–47.
  7. Yacobi R, Kenny DJ, Judd PL, et al. Evoloving primary pulp therapy techniques. J Am Dent Assoc 1991;122(2):83–85. DOI: 10.14219/jada.archive.1991.0054.
  8. Fuks AB. Pulp therapy for the primary and young permanent dentitions. Dent Clin North Am 2000;44:571–596.
  9. Hargeaves KM, Cohen S. Cohen's pathways of the pulp. 10th ed., St. Louis, Mossouri: Mosby Elseiver; 2011. p. 823.
  10. Coll JA, Sadrian R. Predicting pulpectomy success and its relationship to exfoliation and succedaneous dentition. Pediatr Dent 1996;18(1):57–63.
  11. Guelman M, McEachern M, Turner C. Pulpectomies in primary incisors using three delivery systems: an in vitro study. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2004;28(4):323–326. DOI: 10.17796/jcpd.28.4.j634167443m061n3.
  12. Dandashi MB, Nazif MM, ZulloT, et al. An in vitro comparison of three endodontic techniques for primary incisors. Pediatr Dent 1993;15:254–256.
  13. Nurko C, Ranly DM, Garcia-Godoy F, et al. Resorption of a calcium hydroxide/iodoform paste (Vitapex) in root canal therapy for primary teeth: a case report. Pediatr Dent 2000;22:517–520.
  14. Aylard SR, Johnson R. Assessment of filling techniques for primary teeth. Pediatr Dent 1987;9:195–198.
  15. Dean JA, Avery DR, McDonald RE. McDonald and Avery's dentistry for the child and adolescent. 9th ed., St. Louis, Missouri: Mosby Elseiver; 2011. p. 354.
  16. Welbury R, Duggal M, Hosey MT. Pediatric dentistry. 3rd ed., New York (US): Oxford University Press Inc; 2005. p. 170.
  17. Calas P. HEROshapers: the adapted pitch concept. Endod Topics 2005;10(1):155–162. DOI: 10.1111/j.1601-1546.2005.00118.x.
  18. Kaptan F, Sert S, Kayahan B, et al. Comparative evaluation of the preparation efficacies of HERO shaper and Nitiflex root canal instruments in curved canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral RadiolEndod 2005;100(5):636–642. DOI: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2005.01.013.
  19. Memarpour M, Shahidi S, Meshki R. Comparison of different obturation techniques for primary molars by digital radiography. Pediatr Dent 2013;35:236–240.
  20. Veltri M, Mollo A, Mantovani L, et al. A comparative study of Endo flare-Hero shaper and MtwoNiTi instruments in the preparation of curved root canals. Int Endod J 2005;38(9):610–616. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2005.00989.x.
  21. Subramaniam P, Tabrez TA, Babu KL. Microbiological assessment of root canals following use of rotary and manual instruments in primary molars. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2013;38(2):123–127. DOI: 10.17796/jcpd.38.2.j84265t82u60271u.
  22. Dogra S. Comparative evaluation of calcium hydroxide and zinc oxide eugenol as root canal filling materials for primary molars: a clinical and radiographic study. World J Dent 2011;2(3):231–236. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-1088.
  23. Pramila R, Muthu MS, Deepa G, et al. Pulpectomies in primary mandibular molars: a comparison of outcomes using three root filling materials. Int Dent J 2016;49(5):413–421. DOI: 10.1111/iej.12478.
  24. McDonald R. Digital imaging for dentist. Aust Dent J 2001;46(4):301–305. DOI: 10.1111/j.1834-7819.2001.tb00295.x.
  25. Dean JA, Avery DR, McDonald RE. McDonald and Avery's dentistry for the child and adolescent. 9th ed., St. Louis, Missouri: Mosby Elseiver; 2011. p. 61.
  26. Makarem A, Ravandeh N, Ebrahimi M. Radiographic assessment and chair time of rotary instruments in the pulpectomy of primary second molar teeth: a randomised controlled clinical trial. J Dent Res Clin Dent Prospect 2014;8(2):84–89.
  27. Nagarathna C, Vishwanathan S, Krishnamurthy NH, et al. Primary molar pulpectomy using two different obturation techniques: a clinical study. Contemp Clin Dent 2018;9(2):231–236. DOI: 10.4103/ccd.ccd_826_17.
  28. Khubchandani M, Baliga MS, Rawlani SS, et al. Comparative evaluation of different obturation techniques in primary molars: an in vivo study. Eur J Gen Dent 2017;6(1):42–47. DOI: 10.4103/2278-9626.198611.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.