Comparison of reciprocating and rotary instrumentation systems: operation time, working length change and file separation

Year 2014, Volume: 31 Issue: 2, 61 - 67, 21.05.2014

Fatma Yalpı Altun Özgür Uzun

https://doi.org/10.17214/aot.66390

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the operation time, working length change and file separation for Reciproc and WaveOne NiTi reciprocating systems and ProTaper NiTi rotary system in simulated curved canals.

MATERIALS AND METHOD: Ninety resin blocks were divided into three groups, pre-operative working lengths of simulated canals were determined visually using a #10 K-type stainless steel file and a digital caliper. The groups were instrumented with three different instrumentation systems; group 1: ProTaper SX-F2, group 2: Reciproc R25, group 3: WaveOne Primary. Active instrumentation times and instrument fractures were recorded. Active instrumentation times were measured using a digital chronometer. After the shaping procedure, post-operative working lengths of canals were measured and compared with the pre-operative measurements.

RESULTS: A statistically significant difference was found between the three groups (p<0.05). Reciproc system prepared simulated root canals significantly faster than ProTaper and WaveOne systems (p<0.05). WaveOne system prepared the simulated root canals faster than ProTaper (p<0.05). No statistically significant difference was found between the working length change values for ProTaper and Reciproc (p>0.05). However, the working length changes for ProTaper and Reciproc groups were significantly less than that for the WaveOne group (p<0.05). No instrument fracture occured in any group during preparation of the simulated root canals.

CONCLUSION: Regarding the operation time, Reciproc and WaveOne systems were found to be faster, regarding the working length stability, ProTaper and Reciproc systems were found to be safer and regarding the instrument fracture, all three instrumentation systems were found to be safe.

Keywords

Endodontics, Root Canal Preparation, Root Canal Therapy

Resiprokasyon ve dönme hareketi yapan eğe sistemlerinin karşılaştırılması: şekillendirme süresi, çalışma boyu değişimi ve alet kırılması

Abstract

AMAÇ: Reciproc ve WaveOne resiprokasyon sistemleri ile
ProTaper döner sistemin akrilik blokların eğimli yapay kanallarındaki
şekillendirme süreleri, çalışma boyu değişimleri
ve alet kırılmalarının karşılaştırılması amaçlandı.
GEREÇ VE YÖNTEM: Doksan adet akrilik blok üç gruba ayrıldıktan
sonra #10 K-tipi paslanmaz çelik el eğesi ve dijital
kumpas kullanılarak yapay kanalların şekillendirme öncesi
çalışma boyları tespit edildi. Oluşturulan üç grup, üç farklı
enstrüman sistemiyle etkin çalışma süreleri ve meydana
gelen enstrüman kırıkları kaydedilerek şekillendirildi;
1. Grup ProTaper SX-F2, 2. Grup Reciproc R25, 3. Grup WaveOne
Primary. Şekillendirme işleminden sonra, yapay kanalların
çalışma boyları tekrar ölçüldü ve ilk ölçümlerle
karşılaştırıldı.
BULGULAR: Şekillendirme süreleri göz önünde bulundurulduğunda,
3 grup arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı fark
bulundu (p < 0.05). Reciproc sistem, ProTaper ve WaveOne
sistemlere göre istatistiksel olarak anlamlı ölçüde daha
kısa sürede şekillendirme yaptı (p < 0.05). WaveOne sistem,
ProTaper sisteme göre istatistiksel olarak anlamlı ölçüde
daha kısa sürede şekillendirme yaptı (p < 0.05). Çalışma
boyu değişimi açısından, ProTaper ve Reciproc grupları
arasındaki fark istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bulunmadı
(p > 0.05). ProTaper ve Reciproc gruplarındaki çalışma boyu
değişimi, WaveOne grubuna göre istatistiksel olarak anlamlı
ölçüde daha azdı (p < 0.05). Yapay kök kanallarının şekillendirmesi
sırasında hiçbir grupta enstrüman kırığı
meydana gelmedi.
SONUÇ: Şekillendirme süresi bakımından Reciproc ve WaveOne
sistemler daha etkin; çalışma boyu değişimi bakı-
mından ProTaper ve Reciproc sistemler daha güvenilir;
enstrüman kırığı bakımından tüm sistemler güvenilir bulundu

Keywords

Endodonti, kök kanal tedavisi, kök kanalını hazırlama

References

• Dentsplymaillefer.com [Internet]. Ballaigues Switzerland: F19 02 85.X /03 / 2006 [updated 2009 April; cited 2013 Jan 10]. Available from: http://www.dentsplymea.com/sites/default/files/ProTaper_Universal_Treatment_DFU_1.pdf
• Ruddle CJ. The ProTaper Technique. Endod Topics 2005;10:187-90.
• VDW-dental.com [Internet]. Munich Germany [cited 2013 Jan 10]. Available from: http://www.vdw-dental.com/en/products/reciprocatingpreparation/reciproc.html
• Tulsadentalspecialties.com [Internet]. Johnson City: Dentsply International, Inc. [updated 2010 October; cited 2013 Jan 10]. Available from: http://www.tulsadentalspecialties.com/Libraries/Tab_Content_-_Endo_Access_Shaping/WaveOne_Reciprocating_File_DFU.sflb.ashx
• Alaçam T. Kök kanallarının mekanik preparasyonları. Endodonti. Ankara: Özyurt Matbaacılık; 2012. p. 405-514.
• Stern S, Patel S, Foschi F, Sherriff M, Mannocci F. Changes in centring and shaping ability using three nickel–titanium instrumentation techniques analysed by micro-computed tomography (µCT). Int Endod J 2012;45:514-23.
• Paqué F, Zehnder M, De-Deus G. Microtomography-based comparison of reciprocating single-file F2 ProTaper technique versus rotary full sequence. J Endod 2011;37:1394-7.
• Hilaly Eid GE, Wanees Amin SA. Changes in diameter, cross-sectional area, and extent of canal-wall touching on using 3 instrumentation techniques in long-oval canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2011;112:688-95.
• 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.
• 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.
• Berutti E, Chiandussi G, Paolino DS, Scotti N, Cantatore G, Castellucci A, et al. Effect of canal length and curvature on working length alteration with WaveOne reciprocating files. J Endod 2011;37:1687-90.
• Davis RD, Marshall JG, Baumgartner JC. Effect of early coronal flaring on working length change in curved canals using rotary nickel-titanium versus stainless steel instruments. J Endod 2002;28:438-42.
• Farber JP, Bernstein M. The effect of instrumentation on root canal length as measured with an electronic device. J Endod 1983;9:114-5.
• Bryant ST, Thompson SA, al-Omari MA, Dummer PM. Shaping ability of ProFile rotary nickel-titanium instruments with ISO sized tips in simulated root canals: Part 2. Int Endod J 1998;31:282-9.
• Kum KY, Spängberg L, Cha BY, Il-Young J, Seung-Jong L, ChanYoung L. Shaping ability of three ProFile rotary instrumentation techniques in simulated resin root canals. J Endod 2000;26:719-23.
• Schäfer E, Lohmann D. Efficiency of rotary nickel-titanium FlexMaster instruments compared with stainless steel hand K-Flexofile--Part 1. Shaping ability in simulated curved canals. Int Endod J 2002;35:505-13.
• 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.
• Hartmann MS, Barletta FB, Camargo Fontanella VR, Vanni JR. Canal transportation after root canal instrumentation: a comparative study with computed tomography. J Endod 2007;33:962-5.
• Yang GB, Zhou XD, Zhang H, Wu HK. Shaping ability of progressive versus constant taper instruments in simulated root canals. Int Endod J 2006;39:791-9.
• Schirrmeister JF, Strohl C, Altenburger MJ, Wrbas KT, Hellwig E. Shaping ability and safety of five different rotary nickel-titanium instruments compared with stainless steel hand instrumentation in simulated curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2006;101:807-13.
• 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;37:229-38.
• ElAyouti A, Weiger R, Löst C. The ability of root ZX apex locator to reduce the frequency of overestimated radiographic working length. J Endod 2002;28:116-9.
• Gordon MP, Chandler NP. Electronic apex locators. Int Endod J 2004;37:425-37.
• Ravanshad S, Adl A, Anvar J. Effect of working length measurement by electronic apex locator or radiography on the adequacy of final working length: a randomized clinical trial. J Endod 2010;36:1753-6.
• Ibarrola JL, Chapman BL, Howard JH, Knowles KI, Ludlow MO. Effect of preflaring on Root ZX apex locators. J Endod 1999;25:625-6.
• Svec TA, Powers JM. The deterioration of rotary nickel-titanium files under controlled conditions. J Endod 2002;28:105-7.
• Wei X, Ling J, Jiang J, Huang X, Liu L. Modes of failure of ProTaper nickel-titanium rotary instruments after clinical use. J Endod 2007;33:276-9.
• 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.
• Johnson E, Lloyd A, Kuttler S, Namerow K. Comparison between a novel nickel-titanium alloy and 508 nitinol on the cyclic fatigue life of ProFile 25/.04 rotary instruments. J Endod 2008;34:1406-9.
• Shen Y, Cheung GS, Bian Z, Peng B. Comparison of defects in ProFile and ProTaper systems after clinical use. J Endod 2006;32:61-5.
• Larsen CM, Watanabe I, Glickman GN, He J. Cyclic fatigue analysis of a new generation of nickel titanium rotary instruments. J Endod 2009;35:401-3.
• Gao Y, Shotton V, Wilkinson K, Phillips G, Johnson WB. Effects of raw material and rotational speed on the cyclic fatigue of ProFile Vortex rotary instruments. J Endod 2010;36:1205-9.
• Gambarini G, Gerosa R, De Luca M, Garala M, Testarelli L. Mechanical properties of a new and improved nickel-titanium alloy for endodontic use: an evaluation of file flexibility. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2008;105:798-800.
• Gambarini G, Pongione G, Rizzo F, Testarelli L, Cavalleri G, Gerosa R. Bending properties of nickel-titanium instruments: a comparative study. Minerva Stomatol 2008;57:393-8.
• Al-Hadlaq SM, Aljarbou FA, Al Thumairy RI. Evaluation of cyclic flexural fatigue of M-wire nickel-titanium rotary instruments. J Endod 2010;36:305-7.
• da Cunha Peixoto IF, Pereira ES, da Silva JG, Viana AC, Buono VT, Bahia MG. Flexural fatigue and torsional resistance of ProFile GT and ProFile GT series X instruments. J Endod 2010;36:741-4.
• Yared G, Kulkarni GK, Ghossayn F. An in vitro study of the torsional properties of new and used K3 instruments. Int Endod J 2003;36:764-9.
• Guilford WL, Lemons JE, Eleazer PD. A comparison of torque required to fracture rotary files with tips bound in simulated curved canal. J Endod 2005;31:468-70.