Comparison of Edgefile X3-One Curve File Systems and Cold Lateral Condensation-Single Cone Filling Techniques in Monoblocks With Simulated Curved Root Canals

Year 2025, , 25 - 31, 20.01.2025

Deniz Karaosmanoğlu Akin Murat Maden

https://doi.org/10.17567/currresdentsci.1618988

Abstract

Objective: The present study aimed to compare the effects of EdgeFile X3 and One Curve files on the angle of curvature and the effectiveness of cold lateral condensation and single-cone filling techniques in monoblocks with curved root canals.
Methods: One hundred and eight monoblocks were divided into three main groups according to the curvature angle. Main group I had curvature angle of 5° at a distance of 6 mm from the root apex; main group II had curvature angle of 20° at the same distance from the root apex; and main group III had curvature angle of 20° at the same distance and curvature angle of 30° at a distance of 12 mm from the root apex. The main groups were divided into sub and end groups according to the use of Edgefile X3, One Curve, cold lateral condensation and single-cone techniques.
Results: With the One Curve, more straightening was observed in the curvature angle of the root canals in main group III. In main group III, there was a significant negative correlation between the change in apical and coronal curvature angles and the gutta-percha ratio and a significant positive correlation with the canal sealer ratio for both techniques.
Conclusions: With the Edgefile X3 file system, the shaping process took less time and the angular change was less. It was concluded that the main determinant of higher gutta-percha ratio was the filling technique used and the single-cone filling technique was more successful.
Keywords: Transportation, Resin block, EdgeFile X3, One Curve, Single-cone, Cold lateral condensation

Keywords

Transportation, Resin block, EdgeFile X3, One Curve, Single-cone

References

• 1. Sakkir N, Thaha KA, Nair MG, Joseph S, Christalin R. Management of Dilacerated and S-shaped Root Canals - An Endodontist's Challenge. J Clin Diagn Res. 2014;8:22-24.
• 2. Alaçam T. Kök kanallarının mekanik preperasyonu. In: Alaçam T ed. Endodonti. 1st Ed., Ankara: Özyurt Matbaacılık;2012:405-514.
• 3. Hülsmann M, Peters OA, Dummer PMH. Mechanical preparation of root canals: shaping goals, techniques and means. Endod Top. 2005;10:30-76.
• 4. Aminsobhani M, Ghorbanzadeh A, Sharifian MR, Namjou S, Kharazifard MJ. Comparison of Obturation Quality in Modified Continuous Wave Compaction, Continuous Wave Compaction, Lateral Compaction and Warm Vertical Compaction Techniques. J Dent (Tehran). 2015;12:99-108.
• 5. Saleh AM, Gilani PV, Tavanafar S, Schafer E. Shaping ability of 4 different single-file systems in simulated S-shaped canals. J Endod. 2015;41:548–552.
• 6. Topçuoğlu HS, Topçuoğlu G, Akti A, Düzgün S. In Vitro Comparison of Cyclic Fatigue Resistance of ProTaper Next, HyFlex CM, OneShape, and ProTaper Universal Instruments in a Canal with a Double Curvature. J Endod. 2016;42:969-971.
• 7. Jamleh A, Alfadley A, Alghofaili N, Jamleh H, Al Fouzan K. Analysis of Force and Torque with XP Shaper and OneCurve Systems During Shaping of Narrow Canals. Eur Endod J. 2020;5:123-127.
• 8. Versiani MA, Carvalho KKT, Mazzi-Chaves JF, Sousa-Neto MD. Micro-computed Tomographic Evaluation of the Shaping Ability of XP-endo Shaper, iRaCe, and EdgeFile Systems in Long Oval-shaped Canals. J Endod. 2018;44:489-495.
• 9. Khalil WA. Effect of heat treatment on cyclic fatigue, flexibility and phase transformation of two controlled memory niti rotary instruments. Egypt Dent J. 2019;65:1463-1468.
• 10. Hankins PJ, ElDeeb ME. An evaluation of the Canal Master, balanced force, and step-back techniques. J Endod 1996;22:123-130.
• 11. Staffoli S, Grande NM, Plotino G, et al. Influence of environmental temperature, heat-treatment and design on the cyclic fatigue resistance of three generations of a single-file nickel-titanium rotary instrument. Odontology. 2019;107:301-307.
• 12. Zhao D, Shen Y, Peng B, Haapasalo M. Micro-computed tomography evaluation of the preparation of mesiobuccal root canals in maxillary first molars with Hyflex CM, Twisted Files, and K3 instruments. J Endod. 2013;39:385-388.
• 13. Gergi R, Osta N, Bourbouze G, Zgheib C, Arbab-Chirani R, Naaman A. Effects of three nickel titanium instrument systems on root canal geometry assessed by micro-computed tomography. Int Endod J. 2015;48:162-170.
• 14. Lam TV, Lewis DJ, Atkins DR, et al. Changes in root canal morphology in simulated curved canals over-instrumented with a variety of stainless steel and nickel titanium files. Aust Dent J. 1999;44:12–19.
• 15. Gergi R, Rjeily JA, Sader J, Naaman A. Comparison of canal transportation and centering ability of twisted files, Pathfile-ProTaper system, and stainless steel hand K-files by using computed tomography. J Endod. 2010;36:904–907.
• 16. Pak JG, White SN. Pain prevalence and severity before, during and after root canal treatment: a systematic review. J Endod. 2011;37:427–438.
• 17. Alim BA, Garip Berker Y. Evaluation of different root canal filling techniques in severely curved canals by micro-computed tomography. Saudi Dent J. 2020;32:200-205.
• 18. Obeidat RS, Abdallah H. Radiographic evaluation of the quality of root canal obturation of single-matched cone Gutta-percha root canal filling versus hot lateral technique. Saudi Endod J. 2014;4:58.
• 19. Schäfer E, Nelius B, Bürklein S. A comparative evaluation of gutta-percha filled areas in curved root canals obturated with different techniques. Clin Oral Investig. 2012;16:225-230.
• 20. Jarrett IS, Marx D, Covey D, Karmazin M, Lavin M, Gound T. Percentage of canals filled in apical cross sections—an in vitro study of seven obturated techniques. Int Endod J. 2004;37:392–398.
• 21. Yilmaz A, Karagoz-Kucukay I. In vitro comparison of gutta-percha-filled area percentages in root canals instrumented and obturated with different techniques. J Istanb Univ Fac Dent. 2017;51:37-42.
• 22. Wu MK, Özok AR, Wesselink PR. Sealer distribution in root canals obturated by three techniques. Int Endod J. 2000;33:340–345.
• 23. Schäfer E, Zandbiglari T. Solubility of root canal sealers in water and artificial saliva. Int Endod J. 2003;36:660–669.
• 24. Motamedi MRK, Mortaheb A, Zare Jahromi M, Gilbert BE. Micro-CT Evaluation of Four Root Canal Obturation Techniques. Scanning. 2021;2021:6632822.
• 25. Romania C, Beltes P, Boutsioukis C, Dandakis C. Ex-vivo area-metric analysis of root canal obturation using gutta-percha cones of different taper. Int Endod J. 2009;42:491–498.
• 26. Tasdemir T, Yesilyurt C, Ceyhanli KT, Celik D, Er K. Evaluation of apical filling after root canal filling by 2 different techniques. J Can Dent Assoc. 2009;75:201.
• 27. Gordon MPJ, Love RM, Chandler NP. An Evaluation of .06 Tapered Gutta Percha Cones for Filling of .06 Taper Prepared Curved Rooot Canals. Int Endod J. 2005;38:87-96.
• 28. Somma F, Cretella G, Carotenuto M, et al. Quality of thermoplasticized and single point root fillings assessed by micro-computed tomography. Int Endod J. 2011;44:362-369.
• 29. Bal AS, Hicks ML, Barnett F. Comparison of laterally condensed .06 and .02 tapered gutta-perchaand sealer in vitro. J Endod. 2001;27:786–788.
• 30. Wu MK, Fan B, Wessellink PR. Leakage along Apical Root Fillings in Curved Root Canals. J Endod. 2000;26:210-216.