Apical transportation in simulated root canals prepared using HyFlex CM, WaveOne Gold and manual technique
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5335/rfo.v24i3.9589Keywords:
Apical transportation, Reciprocating, Root canal preparation, RotationAbstract
Objective: To assess the apical transportation in simulated root canals with different curvature angles prepared using manual instrumentation and rotary and reciprocating motions. Methods: Sixty simulated root canals were prepared using manual instrumentation (Flexofile K-file) (MT), continuous rotation (HyFlex CM) (HF), and reciprocating motion (WaveOne Gold) (WG). A trained operator prepared the canals, and the apical enlargement was standardized up to a #25 file in all systems tested. Two different curvature angles of the simulated root canals were tested: 70° and 50°. Overlapping photographs of the simulated root canals, before and after root canal preparation, were used to measure the apical transportation (mm), using the ImageJ software. Descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation) were analyzed and the groups were compared with two-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s post-hoc, with α=5%. Results: There was a statistically significant interaction between the effects of group and angle in the apical transportation (F = 3.740; p = 0.031). Simple main effects analysis showed that HyFlex CM produced a significantly lower apical transportation when compared to WaveOne Gold (p = 0.02) and the manual technique (p < 0.01), regardless of the angle. However, there were no differences between WaveOne Gold and manual technique in canals with the 70° angle (p>0.05). The group with the highest mean apical transportation was the MT, with 0.0917 mm, followed by WG and HF, with 0.0633 and 0.0325, respectively. Conclusion: Simulated root canals prepared with rotary motion (HyFlex CM) showed the lowest apical transportation, followed by the reciprocating motion (WaveOne Gold). The manual technique showed the most unfavorable results, with the highest apical transportation.
Downloads
References
EG, Eliades G. A comparative study of the effects of two
nickel-titanium preparation techniques on root canal
geometry assessed by microcomputed tomography. J Endod
2007; 33: 1455-59.
2. Siqueira JF Jr, Lima KC, Magalhães FA, Lopes HP, de Uzeda
M. Mechanical reduction of the bacterial population in the
root canal by three instrumentation techniques. J Endod
1999; 25: 332-35.
3. Celik D, Tasdemir T, Er K. Comparative study of 6 rotary
nickel-titanium systems and hand instrumentation for root
canal preparation in severely curved root canals of extracted
teeth. J Endod 2013; 39: 278-82.
4. Weine FS, Kelly RF, Lio PJ. The effect of preparation
procedures on original canal shape and on apical foramen
shape. J Endod 1975; 1: 255-62.
5. Wu MK, Fan B, Wesselink PR. Leakage along apical
root fillings in curved root canals. Part I: effects of apical
transportation on seal root fillings. J Endod 2000; 26: 210-16.
6. López FU, Fachin EV, Fontanella VRC, Barletta FB, Só MVR,
Grecca FS. Apical transportation: a comparative evaluation
of three root canal instrumentation techniques with three
different apical diameters. J Endod 2008; 34: 1545-48.
7. Freire LG, Gavini G, Cunha RS, Santos MD. Assessing
apical transportation in curved canals: Comparison between
cross-sections and micro-computed tomography. Braz Oral
Res 2012; 26: 222–27.
8. Freire LG, Gavini G, Branco-Barletta F, Sanches-Cunha
R, dos Santos M. Microscopic computerized tomographic
evaluation of root canal transportation prepared with
twisted or ground nickel-titanium rotary instruments. Oral
Surg Oral Med Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2011; 211: 143-48.
9. Zhou H, Shen Y, Zheng W, Li L, Zheng YF, Haapasalo M.
Mechanical Properties of Controlled Memory and Superelastic
Nickel-Titanium Wires Used in the Manufacture of Rotary
Endodontic Instruments. J Endod 2012; 38: 1535-40.
10. Sood A, Jindal ASV, Chhabra A, Arora A, Vats A. Comparison
of apical transportation, centering ability and cyclic fatigue
resistance of four rotary file systems. Dent J Adv Stud 2015;
13: 12-19.
11. Alovisi M, Pasqualini D, Musso E, Bobbio E, Giuliano C,
Mancino D, Scotti N, Berutti E. Influence of contracted
endodontic access on root canal geometry: an in vitro study. J
Endod 2018; 44: 614-20.
12. Pedullà E, Genovesi F, Rapisarda S, La Rosa GRM, Grande
NM, Plotino G, Adorno CG. Effects of 6 single-file systems on
dentinal crack formation. J Endod 2017; 43: 456–61.
13. Merrett SJ, Bryant ST, Dummer PM. Comparison of the
shaping ability of RaCe and FlexMaster rotary nickeltitanium
systems in simulated canals. J Endod 2006; 32:
960–62.
14. Schneider SW. A comparison of canal preparations in straight
and curved root canals. Oral Surg 1971; 2: 271-75.
15. Peter OA. Current challenges and concepts in the preparation
of root canal systems: a review. J Endod 2004; 30: 559-67.
16. Hülsmann M, Peters OA, Dummer PMH. Mechanical
preparation of root canals: shaping goals, techniques and
means. Endod Topics 2005;10:30–76.
17. Tharuni SL, Parameswaran A, Sukumara VG. A comparison
of canal preparation using the K-file and Lightspeed in resin
blocks. J Endod 1996; 22: 474-76.
18. Schäfer E, Florek H. Efficiency of rotary nickel-titanium K3
instruments compared with stainless steel hand K-Flexofile.
Part 1. Shaping ability in simulated curved canals. Int
Endod J 2003; 36: 199-207.
19. Guelzow A, Stamm O, Martus P, Kielbassa AM. Comparative
study of six rotary nickel-titanium systems and hand
instrumentation for root canal preparation. Int Endod J
2009; 42: 1057-64.
20. Ehsani M, Zahedpasha S, Moghadamnia AA, Mirjani J.
An ex-vivo study on the shaping parameters of two nickeltitanium
rotary systems compared with hand instruments.
Iran Endod J 2011; 6: 74-79.
21. Ounsi HF, Franciosi G, Paragliola R, Al-Hezaimi K, Salameh
Z, Tay FR, et al. Comparison of two techniques for assessing
the shaping efficacy of repeatedly used nickel-titanium
Rotary instruments. J Endod 2011; 37: 847-50.
22. Kishore A, Gurtu A, Bansal R, Singhal A, Mohan S, Mehrotra
A. Comparison of canal transportation and centering ability
of Twisted Files, HyFlex controlled memory, and Wave
One using computed tomography scan: An in vitro study. J
Conserv Dent 2017; 20: 161-65.
23. Bürklein S, Börjes L, Schäfer E. Comparison of preparation
of curved root canals with HyFlex CM and Revo-S rotary
nickel-titanium instruments. Int Endod J 2014; 47: 470-76.
24. Saber S, Nagy M, Schäfer E. Comparative evaluation of the
shaping ability of ProTaper Next, iRace and HyFlex CM
rotary NiTi files in severely curved root canals. Int Endod J
2015; 48: 131-36.
25. Özyürek T, Yilmaz K, Uslu G. Shaping ability of Reciproc,
WaveOne Gold and HyFlex EDM single-file systems in
simulated S-shaped canals. J Endod 2017; 43: 805-09.
26. Al-Hadlaq SM, AlJarbou FA, AlThumairy RI. Evaluation
of cyclic flexural fatigue of M-wire nickel-titanium rotary
instruments. J Endod 2010; 36: 305-07.
27. Nazari MK, Shahab S, Rostami G. Canal transportation and
centering ability of twisted file and reciproc: a cone-beam
computed tomography assessment. Iran Endod J 2014; 9:
174-49.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under aCreative Commons Atribuição-NãoComercial-SemDerivações 4.0 Internacional.
