Kayma yolu oluşturulmasının apikalden çıkan debris miktarına ve kök kanal anatomisinin korunmasına etkisi

Year 2022, , 241 - 249, 31.03.2022

Cihan Küden , Oğuz Yoldaş , Burcu Evlice , Sehnaz Yilmaz , Ayşin Dumani

https://doi.org/10.17826/cumj.1024096

Cited By: 1

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışmada, resiprokal tek eğe, tam rotasyon tek eğe ve çok basamaklı eğe sistemleriyle şekillendirme öncesi kayma yolu hazırlığının apikalden debris çıkışına ve kök kanalının yer değiştirmesine üzerindeki etkisinin araştırılması amaçlanmıştır.
Gereç ve Yöntem: Mandibular birinci molar dişlerin yüz yirmi eğimli meziyal kök kanalı rastgele altı gruba dağıtıldı (n=20). Kök kanalları Grup R'de Reciproc, Grup OS'de OneShape ve Grup PN'de ProTaper Next ile hazırlandı. Son üç grupta (RG, OSG ve PNG), ilk 3 grupta kullanılan şekillendirme aletlerinden önce bir kayma yolu oluşturuldu. Preparasyon öncesi ve sonrası ağırlık 10-5 mikro terazi kullanılarak ölçülmüştür. Kök kanallarının preparasyonu öncesi ve sonrası konik ışınlı bilgisayarlı tomografi (KIBT) kullanılarak tarandı.
Bulgular: RG ve OSG'deki debris ekstrüzyonu, sırasıyla R ve OS gruplarından önemli ölçüde daha yüksekti. Ancak, PN ve PNG arasında anlamlı fark bulunmadı. Kök kanal yer değiştirmesine bakıldığında, RG, 5 mm ve 7 mm seviyeleri için R grubundan daha düşüktü ve OSG grubu tüm seviyeler için OS'den daha düşüktü. Bir kayma yolu oluşturmak, OS ve PN grupları için şekillendirme süresini önemli ölçüde arttırmıştır.
Sonuç: Eğimli kanallarda tek eğe sistemi ile şekillendirme öncesinde bir kayma yolu oluşturmak kanal anatomisini korur. Bununla birlikte, apikal debris ekstrüzyonunun artmasına neden olabilir.

Keywords

KIBT, debris çıkışı, kayma yolu, resiprokasyon, kök kanalı, tek eğe

Supporting Institution

Cukurova Üniversitesi Bilimsel Araştırmalar Proje Birimi

Project Number

TDK-2015-4413

Influence of establishing a glide path on the amount of apically extruded debris and the preservation of root canal anatomy

Abstract

Purpose: This study aimed to investigate the effect of glide path preparation before shaping with reciprocating single-file, rotary single-file and multiple-file systems on the debris extrusion from the apical, and on the root canal transportation.
Materials and Methods: One hundred twenty curved mesial root canals of mandibular first molars were randomly distributed to six groups (n=20). The root canals were prepared with Reciproc in Group R, OneShape in Group OS, and ProTaper Next in Group PN. In the last three groups (RG, OSG and PNG), a glide path was created before the shaping instruments used in the first 3 groups. The pre- and post-preparation weight were measured by using a 10-5 microbalance. Pre- and post-preparation of the root canals were scanned by using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT).
Results: The debris extrusion in RG and OSG was significantly higher than R and OS, respectively. However, no significant differences were found between PN and PNG. Considering the root canal transportation, RG showed lower than R for 5 mm and 7 mm levels and the OSG group showed lower than OS for all levels. Creating a glide path significantly increased the shaping time for OS and PN groups.
Conclusion: In advance of shaping with a single-file system in curved canals, creating a glide path preserves canal anatomy. However, it may lead to increase apical debris extrusion.

Keywords

CBCT, debris extrusion, glide path, reciprocation, root canal, single-file

Project Number

TDK-2015-4413

References

• Plotino G, Nagendrababu V, Bukiet F, Grande NM, Veettil SK, De-Deus G et al. Influence of negotiation, glide path, and preflaring procedures on root canal shaping-terminology, basic concepts, and a systematic review. J Endod. 2020;46:707-29.
• Hassan R, Roshdy N, Issa N. Comparison of canal transportation and centering ability of Xp Shaper, WaveOne and Oneshape: a cone beam computed tomography study of curved root canals. Egyptian Dent J. 2018;64:1845-53.
• Bürklein S Schäfer E. Critical evaluation of root canal transportation by instrumentation. Endod Top. 2013;29:110-24.
• Schilder H. Cleaning and shaping the root canal. Dent Clin North Am. 1974;18:269-96.
• Reddy SA, Hicks ML. Apical extrusion of debris using two hand and two rotary instrumentation techniques. J Endod. 1998;24:180-3.
• Walia H, Brantley WA, Gerstein H. An initial investigation of the bending and torsional properties of Nitinol root canal files. J Endod. 1988;14:346-51.
• Bürklein S, Poschmann T, Schäfer E. Shaping ability of different nickel-titanium systems in simulated S-shaped canals with and without glide path. J Endod. 2014;40:1231-4.
• 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;45:449-61.
• Alsilani R, Jadu F, Bogari DF, Jan AM, Alhazzazi TY. Single file reciprocating systems: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature: Comparison of reciproc and WaveOne. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent. 2016;6:402-9.
• Berutti E, Paolino DS, Chiandussi G, Alovisi M, Cantatore G, Castellucci A et al. Root canal anatomy preservation of WaveOne reciprocating files with or without glide path. J Endod. 2012;38:101-4.
• West JD. The endodontic Glidepath: "Secret to rotary safety". Dent Today 2010;29:86-93.
• Plotino G, Nagendrababu V, Bukiet F, Grande NM, Veettil SK, De-Deus G et al. Influence of negotiation, glide path, and preflaring procedures on root canal shaping—terminology, basic concepts, and a systematic review. J Endod. 2020;46:707-29
• Ha JH, Kim SK, Kwak SW, El Abed R, Bae YC, Kim HC. Debris extrusion by glide-path establishing endodontic instruments with different geometries. J Dent Sci. 2016;11:136-40.
• Türker SA, Koçak S, Kocak M, Saglam B. Effect of glide path preparation on apical debris extrusion of rotary and reciprocating single-file systems: OneShape versus WaveOne. Cumhuriyet Dent J. 2015;18:1-8.
• Topçuoğlu H, Düzgün S, Akpek F, Topçuoğlu G, Aktı A. Influence of a glide path on apical extrusion of debris during canal preparation using single‐file systems in curved canals. Int Endod J. 2016;49:599-03.
• Zheng L, Ji X, Li C, Zuo L, Wei X. Comparison of glide paths created with K-files, PathFiles, and the ProGlider file, and their effects on subsequent WaveOne preparation in curved canals. BMC Oral Health. 2018;18:152.
• Van Der Vyver PJ, Paleker F, Vorster M, Francois A. Root canal shaping using nickel titanium, M-wire, and gold wire: A micro–computed tomographic comparative study of one shape, ProTaper next, and WaveOne gold instruments in maxillary first molars. J Endod. 2019;45:62-7.
• Carvalho GM, Sponchiado Junior EC, Garrido AD, Lia RC, Garcia Lda F, Marques AA. Apical transportation, centering ability, and cleaning effectiveness of reciprocating single-file system associated with different glide path techniques. J Endod. 2015;41:2045-9.
• Elnaghy AM, Elsaka SE. Evaluation of root canal transportation, centering ratio, and remaining dentin thickness associated with ProTaper Next instruments with and without glide path. J Endod. 2014;40:2053-6.
• Türker SA, Uzunoğlu E. Apical root canal transportation of different pathfinding systems and their effects on shaping ability of ProTaper Next. J Clin Exp Dent. 2015;7:392-5.
• Vertucci FJ. Root canal anatomy of the human permanent teeth. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1984;58:589-99.
• Schneider SW. A comparison of canal preparations in straight and curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1971;32:271-5.
• Myers GL, Montgomery S. A comparison of weights of debris extruded apically by conventional filing and Canal Master techniques. J Endod. 1991;17:275-9.
• Gambill JM, Alder M, Carlos E. Comparison of nickel-titanium and stainless steel hand-file instrumentation using computed tomography. J Endod. 1996;22:369-75.
• Caviedes‐Bucheli J, Castellanos F, Vasquez N, Ulate E, Munoz H. The influence of two reciprocating single‐file and two rotary‐file systems on the apical extrusion of debris and its biological relationship with symptomatic apical periodontitis. A systematic review and meta‐analysis. Int Endod J. 2016;49:255-70.
• 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;39:1067-70.
• Keleş A, Özyürek EU, Uysal S, Tuncel B, Uyanık Ö, Nagaş E. Comparison of apically extruded debris associated with different nickel–titanium systems. Cumhuriyet Dent J. 2019;22:192-7.
• Bürklein S, Benten S, Schäfer E. Quantitative evaluation of apically extruded debris with different single‐file systems: R eciproc, F 360 and O ne S hape versus M two. Int Endod J. 2014;47:405-9.
• Küçükyilmaz E, Savas S, Saygili G, Uysal B. Assessment of apically extruded debris and irrigant produced by different nickel-titanium instrument systems. Brazilian Oral Res. 2015;29:1-6.
• Zanette F, Grazziotin-Soares R, Flores ME, Camargo FVR, Gavini G, Barletta FB. Apical root canal transportation and remaining dentin thickness associated with ProTaper Universal with and without PathFile. J Endod. 2014;40:688-93.
• Patino PV, Biedma BM, Liebana CR, Cantatore G, Bahillo JG. The influence of a manual glide path on the separation rate of NiTi rotary instruments. J Endod. 2005;31:114-6.
• Çelik N, Kaya S. Comparing the effect of Reciproc R25 rotary file system on the amount of apical extrusion of debris via using it with different reciprocal angles. Int Dent Res. 2021;11:63-6.
• Bürklein S, Benten S, Schäfer E. Shaping ability of different single‐file systems in severely curved root canals of extracted teeth. Int Endod J. 2013;46:590-7.
• Capar ID, Ertas H, Ok E, Arslan H, Ertas ET. Comparative study of different novel nickel-titanium rotary systems for root canal preparation in severely curved root canals. J Endod. 2014;40:852-6.
• Gergi R, Arbab-Chirani R, Osta N, Naaman A. Micro–computed tomographic evaluation of canal transportation instrumented by different kinematics rotary nickel-titanium instruments. J Endod. 2014;40:1223-7.
• Yılmaz F, Eren İ, Eren H, Badi MA, Ocak M, Çelik HH. Evaluation of the amount of root canal dentin removed and apical transportation occurrence after instrumentation with protaper next, oneshape, and edgefile rotary systems. J Endod. 2020;46:662-7.
• Hayashi Y, Yoneyama T, Yahata Y, Miyai K, Hanawa T, Ebihara A et al. Phase transformation behaviour and bending properties of hybrid nickel–titanium rotary endodontic instruments. Int Endod J. 2007;40:247-53.
• van der Vyver PJ, Paleker F, Vorster M, de Wet FA. Micro-computed tomographic evaluation of two single rotary glide path systems. Int Endod J. 2018;52:352-58.
• Gunes B, Yeter KY. Effects of different glide path files on apical debris extrusion in curved root canals. J Endod. 2018;44:1191-4.
• Rashed B, Iino Y, Komatsu K, Nishijo M, Hanada T, Ebihara A et al. Evaluation of root canal anatomy of maxillary premolars using swept-source optical coherence tomography in comparison with dental operating microscope and cone beam computed tomography. Photomed Laser Surg. 2018;36:487-92.