Apical root canal cleaning after preparation with endodontic instruments: a randomized trial in vivo analysis
Fornari Volmir Joao, Hartmann Mateus Silveira Martins, Vanni Jose Roberto, Rodriguez Rubens, Langaro Marina Canali, Pelepenko Lauter Eston, Zaia Alexandre Augusto,
소속 상세정보
( Fornari Volmir Joao ) - Campinas State University Piracicaba Dental School Department of Restorative Dentistry
( Hartmann Mateus Silveira Martins ) - Campinas State University Piracicaba Dental School Department of Restorative Dentistry
( Vanni Jose Roberto ) - Meridional Dental Studies Center
( Rodriguez Rubens ) - Pathology Institute of Passo Fundo
( Langaro Marina Canali ) - Meridional Dental Studies Center
( Pelepenko Lauter Eston ) - Campinas State University Piracicaba Dental School Department of Restorative Dentistry
( Zaia Alexandre Augusto ) - Campinas State University Piracicaba Dental School Department of Restorative Dentistry
Abstract
Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate vital pulp tissue removal from different endodontic instrumentation systems from root canal apical third in vivo.
Materials and Methods: Thirty mandibular molars were selected and randomly divided into 2 test groups and one control group. Inclusion criteria were a positive response to cold sensibility test, curvature angle between 10 and 20 degrees, and curvature radius lower than 10 mm. Root canals prepared with Hero 642 system (size 45/0.02) (n = 10) and Reciproc R40 (size 40/0.06) (n = 10) and control (n = 10) without instrumentation. Canals were irrigated only with saline solution during root canal preparation. The apical third was evaluated considering the touched/untouched perimeter and area to evaluate the efficacy of root canal wall debridement. Statistical analysis used t-test for comparisons.
Results: Untouched root canal at cross-section perimeter, the Hero 642 system showed 41.44% ± 5.62% and Reciproc R40 58.67% ± 12.39% without contact with instruments. Regarding the untouched area, Hero 642 system showed 22.78% ± 6.42% and Reciproc R40 34.35% ± 8.52%. Neither instrument achieved complete cross-sectional root canal debridement. Hero 642 system rotary taper 0.02 instruments achieved significant greater wall contact perimeter and area compared to reciprocate the Reciproc R40 taper 0.06 instrument.
Conclusions: Hero 642 achieved higher wall contact perimeter and area but, regardless of instrument size and taper, vital pulp during in vivo instrumentation is not entirely removed.
키워드
Debridement; Endodontics; Dental instruments
원문 및 링크아웃 정보
등재저널 정보