Apical extrusion of bacteria following the use of reciprocating single-file and rotary multi-file instrumentation systems in oval root canals
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14295/bds.2020.v23i4.2204Abstract
Objective: All instrumentation techniques and instruments are associated with apical extrusion during chemomechanical preparation, and this causes postoperative pain and flare-up. However, it is controversial whether reciprocal systems or rotary systems cause more apical extrusion. The objective of this in vitro study was to determine the differences in the amounts of apically extruded bacteria (AEB) associated with nickel-titanium rotary and reciprocating systems when used in oval-shaped root canals. Material and Methods: Seventy human mandibular premolar teeth with oval-shaped canals were randomly assigned to four experimental groups (15 teeth in each group) and one control group (10 teeth). The root canals were contaminated with Enterococcus faecalis and instrumented using two full-sequence rotary instruments (ProTaper Universal [PTU] and ProTaper Next [PTN]) and two reciprocating single-file instruments (Reciproc [R] and WaveOne [WO]). A 0.9% NaCl solution was used as an irrigant, and the bacterial extrusion was quantified as the number of colony-forming units for each sample. The results were statistically analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis one-way analysis of variance and the Mann-Whitney U test, and the statistical significance level was set at p <0.05. Results: The R system was associated with the highest amount of bacterial extrusion (p <0.05). The PTU system caused more bacterial extrusion than the PTN and WO systems (p <0.05). There was no significant difference between the PTN and WO systems (p >0.05). Conclusions: All instrumentation techniques caused apical bacterial extrusion. The instrument design and preparation techniques affect the number of extruded bacteria.
KEYWORDS
Apical extrusion; Bacteria; Endodontics; Root canal preparation.
References
Siqueira Jr JF, Rôças IN, Favieri A, Machado AG, Gahyva SM, Oliveira JC, et al. Incidence of postoperative pain after intracanal procedures based on an antimicrobial strategy. J Endod. 2002 Jun;28(6):457-60. doi: 10.1097/00004770-200206000-00010.
Siqueira Jr J. Microbial causes of endodontic flare‐ups. Int Endod J. 2003 Jul;36(7):453-63. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.2003.00671.x.
Cabreira LJ, Gominho LF, Rôças IN, Dessaune‐Neto N, Siqueira Jr JF, Alves FR. Quantitative analysis of apically extruded bacteria following preparation of curved canals with three systems. Aust Endod J. 2019 Apr;45(1):79-85. doi: 10.1111/aej.12287.
Amaral P, Forner L, Llena C. Smear layer removal in canals shaped with reciprocating rotary systems. J Clin Exp Dent. 2013 Dec;5(5):e227–30. doi: 10.4317/jced.51170.
Bürklein S, Hinschitza K, Dammaschke T, Schäfer E. Shaping ability and cleaning effectiveness of two single‐file systems in severely curved root canals of extracted teeth: Reciproc and WaveOne versus Mtwo and ProTaper. Int Endod J. 2012 May;45(5):449-61. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2011.01996.x.
Bürklein S, Benten S, Schäfer E. Quantitative evaluation of apically extruded debris with different single‐file systems: Reciproc, F 360 and One Shape versus Mtwo. Int Endod J. 2014 May;47(5):405-9. doi: 10.1111/iej.12161.
Bürklein S, Schäfer E. Apically extruded debris with reciprocating single-file and full-sequence rotary instrumentation systems. J Endod. 2012 Jun;38(6):850-2. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2012.02.017.
Topçuoğlu H, Zan R, Akpek F, Topçuoğlu G, Ulusan Ö, Aktı A, et al. Apically extruded debris during root canal preparation using Vortex Blue, K3 XF, ProTaper Next and Reciproc instruments. Int Endod J. 2016 Dec;49(12):1183-7. doi: 10.1111/iej.12572.
Dietrich MA, Kirkpatrick TC, Yaccino JM. In vitro canal and isthmus debris removal of the self-adjusting file, K3, and WaveOne files in the mesial root of human mandibular molars. J Endod. 2012 Aug;38(8):1140-4. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2012.05.007.
Tinoco J, De‐Deus G, Tinoco E, Saavedra F, Fidel R, Sassone L. Apical extrusion of bacteria when using reciprocating single‐file and rotary multifile instrumentation systems. Int Endod J. 2014 Jun;47(6):560-6. doi: 10.1111/iej.12187.
Beeson T, Hartwell G, Thornton J, Gunsolley J. Comparison of debris extruded apically in straight canals: conventional filing versus ProFile.04 taper series 29. J Endod. 1998 Jan;24(1):18-22. doi: 10.1016/S0099-2399(98)80206-9.
Dincer A, Er O, Canakci B. Evaluation of apically extruded debris during root canal retreatment with several NiTi systems. Int Endod J. 2015 Dec;48(12):1194-8. doi: 10.1111/iej.12425.
Silva E, Carapiá M, Lopes R, Belladonna F, Senna P, Souza E, et al. Comparison of apically extruded debris after large apical preparations by full‐sequence rotary and single‐file reciprocating systems. Int Endod J. 2016 Jul;49(7):700-5. doi: 10.1111/iej.12503.
Koçak S, Koçak MM, Sağlam BC, Türker SA, Sağsen B, Er Ö. Apical extrusion of debris using self-adjusting file, reciprocating single-file, and 2 rotary instrumentation systems. J Endod. 2013 Oct;39(10):1278-80. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2013.06.013.
Kirchhoff AL, Fariniuk LF, Mello I. Apical extrusion of debris in flat-oval root canals after using different instrumentation systems. J Endod. 2015 Feb;41(2):237-41. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2014.09.023.
Schäfer E, Vlassis M. Comparative investigation of two rotary nickel-titanium instruments: ProTaper versus RaCe. Part 1. Shaping ability in simulated curved canals. Int Endod J. 2004 Apr;37(4):229-38. doi: 10.1111/j.0143-2885.2004.00786.x.
Bergmans L, Van Cleynenbreugel J, Beullens M, Wevers M, Van Meerbeek B, Lambrechts P. Progressive versus constant tapered shaft design using NiTi rotary instruments. Int Endod J. 2003 Apr;36(4):288-95. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.2003.00650.x.
Elnaghy AM. Cyclic fatigue resistance of ProTaper Next nickel-titanium rotary files. Int Endod J. 2014 Nov;47(11):1034-9. doi: 10.1111/iej.12244.
Elnaghy AM, Elsaka SE. Assessment of the mechanical properties of ProTaper Next nickel-titanium rotary files. J Endod. 2014 Nov;40(11):1830-4. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2014.06.011.
Ruddle CJ, Machtou P, West JD. The shaping movement: fifth-generation technology. Dent Today. 2013 Apr;32(4):94-9.
Gutmann JL, Gao Y. Alteration in the inherent metallic and surface properties of nickel-titanium root canal instruments to enhance performance, durability and safety: a focused review. Int Endod J. 2012 Feb;45(2):113-28. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2011.01957.x.
de Melo Ribeiro MV, Silva-Sousa YT, Versiani MA, Lamira A, Steier L, Pécora JD, et al. Comparison of the cleaning efficacy of self-adjusting file and rotary systems in the apical third of oval-shaped canals. J Endod. 2013 Mar;39(3):398-401. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2012.11.016.
De-Deus G, Barino B, Zamolyi RQ, Souza E, Júnior AF, Fidel S, et al. Suboptimal debridement quality produced by the single-file F2 ProTaper technique in oval-shaped canals. J Endod. 2010 Nov;36(11):1897-1900. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2010.08.009.
De-Deus G, Reis C, Beznos D, de Abranches AMG, Coutinho-Filho T, Paciornik S. Limited ability of three commonly used thermoplasticized gutta-percha techniques in filling oval-shaped canals. J Endod. 2008 Nov;34(11):1401-5. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2008.08.015.
Schneider SW. A comparison of canal preparations in straight and curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1971 Aug;32(2):271-5. doi: 10.1016/0030-4220(71)90230-1.
Mittal R, Singla MG, Garg A, Dhawan A. A comparison of apical bacterial extrusion in manual, ProTaper rotary, and one shape rotary instrumentation techniques. J Endod. 2015 Dec;41(12):2040-4. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2015.09.002.
Kuştarcı A, Akpınar K, Sümer Z, Er K, Bek B. Apical extrusion of intracanal bacteria following use of various instrumentation techniques. Int Endod J. 2008 Dec;41(12):1066-71. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2008.01470.x.
Er K, Sümer Z, Akpınar K. Apical extrusion of intracanal bacteria following use of two engine‐driven instrumentation techniques. Int Endod J. 2005 Dec;38(12):871-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2005.01029.x.
Collins CH, Lyne PM, Grange JM. Counting methods. In: Collins CH, Lyne PM, Grange JM (ed) Collins’ and Lyne’s microbiological methods, 7th edn. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann; Oxford; 149–162 p.
Ørstavik D, Haapasalo M. Disinfection by endodontic irrigants and dressings of experimentally infected dentinal tubules. Dent Traumatol. 1990 Aug;6(4):142-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-9657.1990.tb00409.x.
Fabricius L, Dahlén G, Holm SE, Möller AJ. Influence of combinations of oral bacteria on periapical tissues of monkeys. Scand J Dent Res. 1982 Jun;90(3):200-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0722.1982.tb00728.x.
Siqueira Jr JF, Rôças IN. Polymerase chain reaction–based analysis of microorganisms associated with failed endodontic treatment. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2004 Jan;97(1):85-94. doi: 10.1016/s1079-2104(03)00353-6.
Capar ID, Ertas H, Arslan H. Comparison of cyclic fatigue resistance of novel nickel‐titanium rotary instruments. Aust Endod J. 2015 Apr;41(1):24-8. doi: 10.1111/aej.12067.
Capar ID, Arslan H, Akcay M, Ertas H. An in vitro comparison of apically extruded debris and instrumentation times with ProTaper Universal, ProTaper Next, Twisted File Adaptive, and HyFlex instruments. J Endod. 2014 Oct;40(10):1638-41. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2014.04.004.
Ozsu D, Karatas E, Arslan H, Topcu MC. Quantitative evaluation of apically extruded debris during root canal instrumentation with ProTaper Universal, ProTaper Next, WaveOne, and self-adjusting file systems. Eur J Dent. 2014 Oct;8(4):504-8. doi: 10.4103/1305-7456.143633.
Jeon IS, Spångberg LS, Yoon TC, Kazemi RB, Kum KY. Smear layer production by 3 rotary reamers with different cutting blade designs in straight root canals: a scanning electron microscopic study. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2003 Nov;96(5):601-7. doi: 10.1016/s1079-2104(03)00303-2.
Rödig T, Hülsmann M, Kahlmeier C. Comparison of root canal preparation with two rotary NiTi instruments: ProFile. 04 and GT Rotary. Int Endod J. 2007 Jul;40(7):553-62. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2007.01270.x.
Robinson JP, Lumley PJ, Cooper PR, Grover LM, Walmsley AD. Reciprocating root canal technique induces greater debris accumulation than a continuous rotary technique as assessed by 3-dimensional micro–computed tomography. J Endod. 2013 Aug;39(8):1067-70. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2013.04.003.
De-Deus G, Neves A, Silva EJ, Mendonça TA, Lourenço C, Calixto C, Lima EJM. Apically extruded dentin debris by reciprocating single-file and multi-file rotary system. Clin Oral Investig. 2015 Mar;19(2):357-61. doi: 10.1007/s00784-014-1267-5.
Downloads
Published
Versions
- 2020-10-01 (2)
- 2020-09-30 (1)
