EFFECT OF SEPARATED ROTARY INSTRUMENTS ON THE APICAL MICROLEAKAGE OF ROOT CANAL FILLINGS

Abstract

Aim: The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the effect of separated fragments from two different nickel titanium rotary instruments on microleakage of the root canal filling. Material and method: Extracted anterior teeth with single canal and straight roots were used. The teeth were divided into three groups. Group 1 and Group 3 (the control group) were shaped with ProTaper® rotary nickel-titanium (NiTi) files; Group 2 was shaped with Revo-S® rotary files. In Group 1, ProTaper® F3 files and in Group 2, Revo-S® 30/06 files, were broken in the apical one-third part of the root canals. All canals were obturated with gutta-percha and AH Plus sealer. After immersion in basic fuchsine stain solutions for 48 h, the roots were longitudinally sectioned. Digital photographs of the root sections were evaluated with image analysis software. Statistical analyses were performed with one way ANOVA and Tamhane test. Results: Microleakage of the control group was significantly less than Group 1 and Group 2. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the microleakage values of the groups separated ProTaper® or Revo-S® instruments. Conclusion: Separation of rotary NiTi instruments in the root canals negatively affected the apical seal of the root canal fillings, regardless of the instrument type

Keywords

• instrument, microleakage, dye leakageProTaper®, Revo-S®, fractured

KÖK KANALINDA KIRILMIŞ DÖNER ALETLERİN KÖK KANALININ APİKAL MIKROSIZINTISI ÜZERİNE ETKİSİ

Abstract

Aim: The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the effect of separated fragments from two different nickel titanium rotary instruments on microleakage of the root canal filling.

Material and method: Extracted anterior teeth with single canal and straight roots were used. The teeth were divided into three groups. Group 1 and Group 3 (the control group) were shaped with ProTaper^® rotary nickel-titanium (NiTi) files; Group 2 was shaped with Revo-S^® rotary files. In Group 1, ProTaper^® F3 files and in Group 2, Revo-S^® 30/06 files, were broken in the apical one-third part of the root canals. All canals were obturated with gutta-percha and AH Plus sealer. After immersion in basic fuchsine stain solutions for 48 h, the roots were longitudinally sectioned. Digital photographs of the root sections were evaluated with image analysis software. Statistical analyses were performed with one way ANOVA and Tamhane test.

Results: Microleakage of the control group was significantly less than Group 1 and Group 2. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the microleakage values of the groups separated ProTaper^® or Revo-S^® instruments.

Conclusion: Separation of rotary NiTi instruments in the root canals negatively affected the apical seal of the root canal fillings, regardless of the instrument type.

Keywords

• ProTaper®, Revo-S®, kırık alet, mikrosızıntı, boya penetrasyon

References

1. Hubscher W, Barbakow F, Peters OA. Root-canal preparation with FlexMaster: canal shapes analysed by micro-computed tomography. Int Endod J 2003;36:740-7.
2. Ruddle CJ. Nonsurgical endodontic retreatment. J Calif Dent Assoc 2004;32:474-84.
3. Iqbal MK, Kohli MR, Kim JS. A retrospective clinical study of incidence of root canal instrument separation in an endodontics graduate program: a PennEndo database study. J Endod 2006;32:1048- 52.
4. Parashos P, Messer HH. Rotary NiTi instrument fracture and its consequences. J Endod 2006;32:1031-43.
5. Al-Fouzan KS. Incidence of rotary ProFile instrument fracture and the potential for bypassing in vivo. Int Endod J 2003;36:864-7.
6. Spili P, Parashos P, Messer HH. The impact of instrument fracture on outcome of endodontic treatment. J Endod 2005;31:845-50.
7. Alapati SB, Brantley WA, Svec TA, et al. SEM observations of nickel-titanium rotary endodontic instruments that fractured during clinical use. J Endod 2005;31:40-3.
8. Wu J, Lei G, Yan M, et al. Instrument separation analysis of multi-used ProTaper Universal rotary system during root canal therapy. J Endod 2011;37:758-63.

9. Souter NJ, Messer HH. Complications associated with fractured file removal using an ultrasonic technique. J Endod 2005;31:450-2.
10. Ward JR, Parashos P, Messer HH. Evaluation of an ultrasonic technique to remove fractured rotary nickel-titanium endodontic instruments from root canals: an experimental study. J Endod 2003; 29:756-63.
11. Suter B, Lussi A, Sequeira P. Probability of removing fractured instruments from root canals. Int Endod J 2005;38:112-23.
12. Ingle JI, Glick D. The Washington study. In: Ingle JI, editor. Endodontics. 1 ed. Philadelphia: Lea and Febiger; 1965.54
13. Crump MC, Natkin E. Relationship of broken root canal instruments to endodontic case prognosis: a clinical investigation. J Am Dent Assoc 1970;80:1341-7.
14. Madarati AA, Watts DC, Qualtrough AJ. Opinions and attitudes of endodontists and general dental practitioners in the UK towards the intracanal fracture of endodontic instruments: part 1. Int Endod J 2008;41:693-701.
15. Lin LM, Rosenberg PA, Lin J. Do procedural errors cause endodontic treatment failure? J Am Dent Assoc 2005;136:187-93; quiz 231.
16. Hulsmann M, Schinkel I. Influence of several factors on the success or failure of removal of fractured instruments from the root canal. Endod Dent Traumato. 1999;15:252-8.
17. Peters OA, Peters CI, Schonenberger K, Barbakow F. ProTaper rotary root canal preparation: effects of canal anatomy on final shape analysed by micro CT. Int Endod J 2003;36:86-92.
18. Roland DD, Andelin WE, Browning DF, Hsu GH, Torabinejad M. The effect of preflaring on the rates of separation for 0.04 taper nickel titanium rotary instruments. J Endod 2002;28:543-5.
19. Madarati AA, Qualtrough AJ, Watts DC. A microcomputed tomography scanning study of root canal space: changes after the ultrasonic removal of fractured files. J Endod 2009;35:125-8.
20. Fors UG, Berg JO. Endodontic treatment of root canals obstructed by foreign objects. Int Endod J 1986;19:2-10.
21. Madarati A, Watts DC, Qualtrough AE. A survey on the experience of UK endodontists and general practitioners in the management of intracanal fractured files. Int Endod J 2008;41:816.
22. Shen Y, Peng B, Cheung GS. Factors associated with the removal of fractured NiTi instruments from root canal systems. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2004;98:605-10.
23. Çiçek E, Bodrumlu E. Ultrasonics in endodontics: a review. J Dent Fac Atatürk Uni 2012;6:76-83.
24. Saunders JL, Eleazer PD. Effect of a separated instrument on bacterial penetration of obturated root canals. J Endod 2004;30:177-179.
25. Torabinejad M, Ung B, Kettering JD. In vitro bacterial penetration of coronally unsealed endodontically 1990;16:566-9. teeth. J Endod
26. Khayat A, Lee SJ, Torabinejad M. Human saliva penetration of coronally unsealed obturated root canals. J Endod 1993;19:458-61.
27. Barthel CR, Moshonov J, Shuping G, Orstavik D. Bacterial leakage versus dye leakage in obturated root canals. Int Endod J 1999;32:370-5.
28. Kersten HW, Moorer WR. Particles and molecules in endodontic leakage. Int Endod J 1989;22:118- 24.
29. Altundasar E, Sahin C, Ozcelik B, Cehreli ZC. Sealing properties of different obturation systems applied over apically fractured rotary nickel- titanium files. J Endod 2008;34:194-7.