Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Changes in root canal anatomy using three nickel-titanium rotary system: a cone beam computed tomography analysis

Abstract

AIM: Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) was used to evaluate the ability of three NiTi rotary systems to maintain the original root canal anatomy. METHODS: Sixty mesiobuccal canals of human mandibular first molars were divided into three groups with 20 root canals each. All teeth were scanned by CBCT before instrumentation. The images were captured digitally for further analysis using the Image Tools Software. The images were sectioned in three points, located at 9 mm, 6 mm and 3mm from the apex. In Group 1, the root canals were instrumented with ProTaper UniversalTM rotary system; in Group 2, with Twisted FileTM rotary system; and in Group 3, with MtwoTM rotary system. Instrumented teeth were scanned again using CBCT and the images of the uninstrumented canals were compared with images of the instrumented canals. The results were statistically analyzed using the one-way ANOVA test. A level of significance of 0.05 was adopted. RESULTS: The means of D1 at distances of 9 mm, 6 mm, and 3 mm from the apex were, respectively: Group 1: 0.88±0.257, 1.00±0.000, and 1.00±0.000; Group 2: 0.79±0.745, 0.65±0.669, and 0.25±0; Group 3: 0.50±0.745, 0.33±0.472, and 0.03±0.104. The means of D2 at distances of 9 mm, 6mm, and 3mm from the apex were respectively: Group 1: 1.00±0.00, 1.00±0.00, and 1.00±0.00; Group 2: 0.41±0.299, 0.30±0.428, and 0.50±0.707; Group 3: 0.58±0.910, 0.85±1.857, and 0.31±0.643. CONCLUSIONS: The CBCT analysis revealed that the ProTaper UniversalTM produced centered preparations and while the Twisted FileTM and MtwoTM rotary systems produced canal deviation.

root canal preparation; tomography; emission-computed


  • 1
    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;36:904-7.
  • 2
    El Ayouti A, Dima E, Judenhofer MS, Löst C, Pichler BJ. Increased apical enlargement contributes to excessive dentin removal in curved root canals: a stepwise microcomputed tomography study. J Endod. 2011;37:1580-4.
  • 3
    Câmara AC, Aguiar CM, Figueiredo JAP de. Assessment of the deviation after biomechanical preparation of the coronal, middle, and apical thirds of root canals instrumented with three Hero rotary systems. J Endod. 2007;33:1460-3.
  • 4
    Aguiar CM, Mendes D de A, Câmara AC, Figueiredo JAP de. Assessment of canal walls after biomechanical preparation of root canals instrumented with ProTaper UniversalTM rotary system. J Appl Oral Sci. 2009;17:590-5.
  • 5
    Mendes D de A, Aguiar CM, Câmara AC. Comparison of the centering ability of the ProTaper Universal, ProFile and Twisted File Rotary Systems. Braz J Oral Sci. 2011;10:282-7.
  • 6
    Ünal GÇ, Maden M, Savgat A, Onur Orhan E. Comparative investigation of 2 rotary nickel-titanium instruments: ProTaper Universal versus ProTaper. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2009;107:886-92.
  • 7
    Kim HC, Yum J, Hur B, Cheung GSP. Cyclic fatigue and fracture characteristics of ground and twisted nickel-titanium rotary files. J Endod. 2010;36:147-52.
  • 8
    Larsen CM, Watanabe I, Glickman GN, He J. Cyclic fatigue analysis of a new generation of nickel titanium rotary instruments. J Endod. 2009;35:401-3.
  • 9
    Yang G, Yuan G, Yun X, Zhou X, Liu B, Wu H. Effects of Mtwo versus ProTaper Universal, on root canal geometry assessed by micro-computed tomography. J Endod. 2011;37:1412-6.
  • 10
    Foschi F, Nucci C, Montebugnoli L, Marchionni S, Breschi L, Malagnino VA, Prati C. SEM evaluation of canal wall dentine following use of Mtwo and ProTaper NiTi rotary instruments. Int Endod J. 2004;37:832-9.
  • 11
    Hin ES, Wu MK, Wesswlink PR, Shemesh H. Effects of self-adjusting file, Mtwo, and ProTaper. J Endod. 2013;39:262-4.
  • 12
    Bernardes RA, Rocha EA, Duarte MAH, Vivan RR, Moraes IG de, Bramante AS, Azevedo JR de. Root canal area increase promoted by the EndoSequence and ProTaper systems: comparison by computed tomography. J Endod. 2010;36:1179-82.
  • 13
    Günday M, Sazak H, Garip Y. A Comparative study of three different root canal curvature measurement techniques and measuring the canal access angle in curved canals. J Endod. 2005;31:796-8.
  • 14
    Sanfelice CM, Costa FB da, Só MVR, Vier-Pelisser F, Bier CAS, Grecca FS. Effects of four instruments on coronal pre-enlargement by using cone beam computed tomography. J Endod. 2010;36:858-61.
  • 15
    Gambill JM, Alder M, Del Rio CE. Comparison of nickel-titanium and stainless steel hand-file instrumentation using computed tomography. J Endod. 1996;22:369-75.
  • 16
    Stern S, Patel S, Foschi F, Sherriff M, Mannocci F. Changes in centring and shaping ability using three nickel-titanium instrumentation techniques analysed by micro-computed tomography (µCT). Int Endod J. 2012;45:514-23.
  • 17
    Venkateshbabu N, Emmanuel S, Santosh GK, Kandaswamy D. Comparison of the canal centring ability of K3, Liberator and EZ Fill Safesiders by using spiral computed tomography. Aust Endod J. 2012;38:55-9.
  • 18
    Sydney GB, Batista A, De Mello LL. The radiographic platform: a new method to evaluate root canal preparation in vitro. J Endod. 1991;17:570-2.
  • 19
    Pasternak-Júnior B, Sousa-Neto MD, Siva RG. Canal transportation and centring ability of RaCe Rotary instruments. Int Endod J. 2009;42:499-506.
  • 20
    Flores CB, Machado P, Montagner F, Gomes BPF de A, Dotto GN, Schmitz M da S. A methodology to standardize the evaluation of root canal instrumentation using cone beam computed tomography. Braz J Oral Sci. 2012;11:84-7.
  • 21
    Özer SY. Comparison of root canal transportation induced by three rotary systems with noncutting tips using computed tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2011;111:244-50.
  • 22
    Michetti J, Maret D, Mallet JP, Diemer F. Validation of cone beam computed tomography as a tool to explore root canal anatomy. J Endod. 2010;36:1187-90.
  • 23
    Pasqualini D, Bianchi CC, Paolino DS, Mancini L, Cemenasco A, Cantatore, Castelluci A, Berutti E G. Computed micro-tomographic evaluation of glide path with nickel-titanium rotary PathFile in maxillary first molars curved canals. J Endod. 2012;38:389-93.
  • 24
    Schäfer E, Oitzinger M. Cutting efficiency of five different types of rotary nickel-titanium instruments. J Endod. 2008;34:198-200.
  • 25
    Machado ME de L, Sapia LAB, Cai S, Martins GHR, Nabeshima CK. Comparison of two rotary systems in root canal preparation regarding disinfection. J Endod. 2010;36:1238-40.
  • 26
    Schäfer E, Erler M, Dammaschke T. Comparative study on the shaping ability and cleaning efficiency of rotary Mtwo instruments. Part 2. Cleaning effectiveness and shaping ability in severely curved root canals of extracted teeth. Int Endod J. 2006;39:203-12.
  • 27
    Mounce RE. Making endo fun again: Get twisted. Dent Econ. 2008;98:23.
  • 28
    Duran-Sindreu F, García M, Olivieri JG, Mercadé M, Morelló S, Roig M. A comparison of apical transportation between FlexMaster and Twisted Files rotary instruments. J Endod. 2012;38:993-5.
  • 29
    Marzouk AM, Ghoneim AG. Computed tomographic evaluation of canal shape instrumented by different kinematic rotary nickel-titanium systems. J Endod. 2013;39:906-9.
  • 30
    Siqueira Júnior JF, Alves FRF, Versiani MA, Rôças IN, Almeida BM, Neves MAS, Sousa-Neto MD. Correlative bacteriologic and micro-computed tomographic analysis of mandibular molar mesial canals prepared by self-adjusting file, Reciproc, and Twisted File systems. J Endod. 2013;39:1044-50.
  • 31
    Aguiar CM, Sobrinho PB, Teles F, Câmara AC, Figueredo JAP. Comparison of the centering ability of the ProTaperTM and ProTaperUniversalTM rotatory systems for preparing curved root canals. Aust Endod J. 2013;39:25-30.
  • 32
    Hartmann MSM, Barletta FB, Fontanella VRC, Vanni JR. Canal transportation after root canal instrumentation: a comparative study with computed tomography. J Endod. 2007;33:962-5.
  • 33
    Huang X, Ling J, Gu L. Quantitative evaluation of debris extruded apically by using ProTaper Universal Tulsa rotary system in endodontic retreatment. J Endod. 2007;33:1102-10.
  • 34
    Versiani MA, Leoni GB, Steier L, De-Deus G, Tassani S, Pécora JD, Sousa-Neto MD. Micro-computed tomography study of oval-shaped canals prepared with the self-adjusting file, Reciproc, WaveOne, and ProTaper Universal systems. J Endod. 2013;33:1060-6.
  • 35
    Câmara AS, Martins R de C, Viana ACD, Leonardo R de T, Buono VTL, Bahia MG de A. Flexibility and torsional strength of ProTaper and ProTaper Universal rotary instruments assessed by mechanical tests. J Endod. 2009;35:113-6.
  • 36
    Hashem AAR, Ghoneim AG, Lutfy RA, Foda MY, Omar GAF. Geometric analysis of root canals prepared by four rotary NiTi shaping systems. J Endod. 2012;38:996-1000.

Publication Dates

  • Publication in this collection
    31 Jan 2014
  • Date of issue
    Dec 2013

History

  • Received
    26 Aug 2013
  • Accepted
    25 Nov 2013
Faculdade de Odontologia de Piracicaba - UNICAMP Avenida Limeira, 901, cep: 13414-903, Piracicaba - São Paulo / Brasil, Tel: +55 (19) 2106-5200 - Piracicaba - SP - Brazil
E-mail: brjorals@unicamp.br