Comparison of Volumetric Changes in Primary Molar Root Canals by Four Different File Systems: A Cone-beam Computed Tomography Study
Puzhikkunnath K Nabeeh, Chandru T Premkumar, Dhanesh Narasimhan
Citation Information :
Nabeeh PK, Premkumar CT, Narasimhan D. Comparison of Volumetric Changes in Primary Molar Root Canals by Four Different File Systems: A Cone-beam Computed Tomography Study. J South Asian Assoc Pediatr Dent 2021; 4 (2):112-116.
Aim and objective: To evaluate and compare the pre- and post-instrumentation canal volume using hand K-files, ProTaper Gold rotary files, Kedo-S rotary files, and One Shape rotary files in primary molars using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT).
Materials and methods: The study was done on 40 primary molars randomly divided into four groups of 10 teeth. Samples were subjected to CBCT scan and image analysis before instrumentation, following which the teeth were instrumented with respective endo files. Post-instrumentation CBCT scan was done and volume of the canal was measured from CEJ to apex. The obtained values were statistically analyzed to find the level of significance using mean, standard deviation. Statistical analysis was further done using one-way ANOVA and a post hoc test.
Results: A statistically significant difference was observed in dentin removal by hand K-files when compared with rotary file groups. One Shape files removed less root dentin followed by Kedo-S rotary files, ProTaper Gold rotary files, and hand K-files, respectively.
Conclusion: It can be concluded that rotary files, mainly One Shape and Kedo-S files can be used as an acceptable instrument in roots of primary teeth as it shows the least root dentin removal.
Ochoa-Romero T, Mendez-Gonzalez V, Flores-Reyes H, et al. Comparison between rotary and manual techniques on duration of instrumentation and obturation times in primary teeth. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2011;35(4):359–364. DOI: 10.17796/jcpd.35.4.8k013k21t39245n8.
Venkateshbabu N, Porkodi I, Pradeep G. Canal-centering ability: an endodontic challenge. J Conserv Dent 2009;12(1):3–9. DOI: 10.4103/0972-0707.53334.
Tomer AK, Miglani A, Chauhan P, et al. An in vitro evaluation of remaining dentine thickness through CBCT using different files. IOSR J Dent Med Sci 2017;16(2):121–124. DOI: 10.9790/0853-160201121124.
Suneetha MG, Moiz AA, Sharief H, et al. Residual root dentin thickness for three different rotary systems: a comparative cone beam computed tomography in vitro study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2020;38(1):48–55. DOI: 10.4103/JISPPD.JISPPD_190_19.
Singh S, Gupta T, Pandey V, et al. Shaping ability of two-shape and ProTaper gold files by using cone-beam computed tomography. J Contemp Dent Pract 2019;20(3):330–334. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2518.
Durack C, Patel S. Cone beam computed tomography in endodontics. Braz Dent J 2012;23(3):179–191. DOI: 10.1590/s0103-64402012000300001.
Cuny E, Carpenter WM. Extracted teeth: decontamination, disposal and use. J Calif Dent Assoc 1997;25(11):801–804.
Reddy PJ, Kumar VS, Aravind K, et al. Canal shaping with one shape file and twisted files: a comparative study. J Clin Diagn Res 2014;8(12):ZF01–ZF03. DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2014/11126.5333.
Jeevanandan G, Govindaraju L. Clinical comparison of Kedo-S paediatric rotary files vs manual instrumentation for root canal preparation in primary molars: a double blinded randomised clinical trial. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 2018;19(4):273–278. DOI: 10.1007/s40368-018-0356-6.
Kuo CI, Wang YL, Chang HH, et al. Application of Ni-Ti rotary files for pulpectomy in primary molars. J Dent Sci 2006;1:10–15.
Musale PK, Mujawar SAV. Evaluation of the efficacy of rotary vs. hand files in root canal preparation of primary teeth in vitro using CBCT. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 2014; 15(2):113–120. DOI: 10.1007/s40368-013-0072-1.
Selvakumar H, Anandhan V, Thomas E, et al. Evaluation of canal transportation and centering ability of K 3 (0.02%) and K 3 (0.04%) with hand K files in primary teeth using spiral computed tomography. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2014;32(4):286. DOI: 10.4103/0970-4388.140943.
Lim SS, Stock CJ. The risk of perforation in the curved canal. Anticurvature filing compared with the stepback technique. Int Endod J 1987;20(1):33–39. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.1987.tb00586.x.
Musale PK, Jain KR, Kothare SS. Comparative assessment of dentin removal following hand and rotary instrumentation in primary molars using cone-beam computed tomography. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2019;37(1):80. DOI: 10.4103/JISPPD.JISPPD_210_18.
Kummer TR, Calvo MC, Cordeiro MM, et al. Ex vivo study of manual and rotary instrumentation techniques in human primary teeth. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2008;105(4):e84–e92. DOI: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2007.12.008.
Rashid AA, Saleh AR. Shaping ability of different endodontic single-file systems using simulated resin blocks. Int J Multidiscip Dent 2016;6(2):61. DOI: 10.4103/2229-6360.197745.
Saleh AM, Gilani PV, Tavanafar S, et al. Shaping ability of 4 different single-file systems in simulated S-shaped canals. J Endod 2015;41(4):548–552. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2014.11.019.
Arias A, de Vasconcelos RA, Hernández A, et al. Torsional performance of ProTaper gold rotary instruments during shaping of small root canals after 2 different glide path preparations. J Endod 2017;43(3):447–451. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2016.10.034.
Bayram HM, Bayram E, Ocak M, et al. Effect of ProTaper gold, self-adjusting file, and XP-endo shaper instruments on dentinal microcrack formation: a micro-computed tomographic study. J Endod 2017;43(7):1166–1169. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2017.02.005.
Arslan H, Yildiz E, Gunduz H, et al. Comparative study of ProTaper gold, reciproc, and ProTaper universal for root canal preparation in severely curved root canals. J Conserv Dent 2017;20(4):222–224. DOI: 10.4103/JCD.JCD_94_17.
Jeevanandan G. Kedo-S paediatric rotary files for root canal preparation in primary teeth – case report. J Clin Diagn Res 2017;11(3):ZR03–ZR05. DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2017/25856.9508.
