Micro-CT Evaluation of Centering Ability and Canal Transportation of Protaper Ultimate and RevoS+ Rotary File Systems in Simulated Curved Canals

Abstract

Purpose A successful root canal preparation is to remove infected dentin and pulp tissue and to obturate the canal three-dimensionally. This study aimed to compare the centering ability of Protaper Ultimate and RevoS+ rotary file systems in curved canals of printed mandibular first molars by using micro-computed tomography (micro-CT). Materials and Methods In this in-vitro study, 16 mandibular molar teeth were printed from resin with 45° mesial root curvature. Root canal preparation was performed according to the specified groups, either Protaper Ultimate or RevoS+. The pre-and post-preparation images were repositioned in all three spatial planes by DataViewer. All images were imported into the CTAn software for the calculation of the centering ability and transportation values. Results The results showed no significant differences between the Protaper Ultimate and RevoS+ groups in terms of the centering ratio in the most inclined part of the canal. There were also no significant differences between the groups in canal transportation. (p>0.05) Conclusions Protaper Ultimate and RevoS+ rotary file systems showed similar ability in centering ratio and canal transportation in curved canals from printed mandibular molars.

Keywords

• Root canal preparation
• Centering ratio
• Simulated canals
• Transportation

References

1. 1. Omori S, Ebihara A, Hirano K, Kasuga Y, Unno H, Nakat- sukasa T, et al. Effect of Rotational Modes on Torque/Force Generation and Canal Centering Ability during Rotary Root Canal Instrumentation with Differently Heat-Treated Nickel–Titanium Instruments. Materials. 2022;15(19):6850
2. 2. Pedulla E, Corsentino G, Ambu E, Rovai F, Campedelli F, Rapisarda S, et al. Influence of continuous rotation or reciprocation of Optimum Torque Reverse motion on cyclic fatigue resistance of nickel-titanium rotary instru- ments. International endodontic journal. 2018;51(5):522–528. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.12769.
3. 3. Dentsply. Sirona D, editor. Dentsply Sirona [Web Page]. Dentsply Sirona; 2022. Available from: https://www.dentsplysirona.com/en-us/discover/ discover-by-brand/protaper-ultimate-solution/ protaper-ultimate-endodontic-files.html.
4. 4. Hashem AAR, Ghoneim AG, Lutfy RA, Foda MY, Omar GAF. Geometric analysis of root canals prepared by four ro- tary NiTi shaping systems. J Endod. 2012;38(7):996–1000. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2012.03.018.
5. 5. Ahmetoglu F, Keles A, Simsek N, Ocak MS, Yologlu S. Com- parative evaluation of root canal preparations of maxillary first molars with self-adjusting file, reciproc single file, and revo-s rotary file: A micro-computed tomography study. Scanning. 2015;37(3):218–225. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/sca.21202.
6. 6. Chaniotis A, Ordinola-Zapata R. Present status and future direc- tions: Management of curved and calcified root canals. Int En- dod J. 2022;55:656–684. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.13685.
7. 7. Antony SDP, Subramanian AK, Nivedhitha M, Solete P. Com- parative evaluation of canal transportation, centering ability, and dentin removal between ProTaper Gold, One Curve, and Profit S3: An in vitro study. JCD. 2020;23(6):632. doi:https : //doi.org/10.4103/jcd.jcd61920.
8. 8. Liu JY, Zhou ZX, Tseng WJ, Karabucak B. Comparison of canal transportation and centering ability of manual K-files and re- ciprocating files in glide path preparation: a micro-computed tomography study of constricted canals. BMC Oral Health. 2021;21:1–6. doi:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-021-01440-3.

9. 9. Çiftçioğlu E, Keleş A, Dinçer GA, Ateş MO, Küçükay ES. Shap- ing ability of WaveOne Gold and OneReci by using two api- cal sizes: a micro-computed tomographic assessment. Peer J. 2023;11:e15208. doi:https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.15208.
10. 10. Gambill JM, Alder M, Carlos E. Comparison of nickel- titanium and stainless steel hand-file instrumentation us- ing computed tomography. J Endod. 1996;22(7):369–375. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/s0099-2399(96)80221-4.
11. 11. Sousa-Neto MDd, Silva-Sousa YC, Mazzi-Chaves JF, Carvalho KKT, Barbosa AFS, Versiani MA, et al. Root canal preparation using micro-computed tomography analysis: a literature re- view. Braz Oral Res. 2018;32. doi:https://doi.org/10.1590/1807- 3107bor-2018.vol32.0066.
12. 12. Endodontic Case Difficulty Assessment Form and Guidelines. [Web Page]. American Association of En- dodontists; 2022. Available from: https://www.aae. org/specialty/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2022/01/ CaseDifficultyAssessmentFormFINAL2022.pdf.
13. 13. Hartmann RC, Fensterseifer M, Peters OA, De Figueiredo J, Gomes MS, Rossi-Fedele G. Methods for measurement of root canal curvature: a systematic and critical review. Int Endod J. 2019;52(2):169–180. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.12996.
14. 14. Armagan S, Haznedaroglu F. Scanning electron microscopy analysis of conventional and controlled-memory nickel tita- nium files before and after multi-uses in root canals. MRT. 2021;84(6):1321–1327. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/jemt.23691.
15. 15. Liang Y, Yue L. Evolution and development: engine-driven endodontic rotary nickel-titanium instruments. Int J Oral Sci. 2022;14(1):12. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/s41368-021-00154- 0.
16. 16. Cui Z, Wei Z, Du M, Yan P, Jiang H. Shaping ability of protaper next compared with waveone in late-model three- dimensional printed teeth. BMC Oral Health. 2018;18(1):1–8. doi:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-018-0573-8.
17. 17. Falakaloglu S, Silva EJNL, Yeniceri Ozata M, Gundogar M. Shap- ing ability of different NiTi rotary systems during the prepa- ration of printed mandibular molars. Aust Endod J. 2022. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/aej.12649.
18. 18. Gucyetmez Topal B, Falakaloglu S, Silva E, Gundogar M, Iriboz E. Shaping ability of novel nickel-titanium systems in printed primary molars. International Journal of Paediatric Dentistry. 2023;33(2):168–177. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/ipd.13031. 19. Xu F, Zhang Y, Gu Y, Ping Y, Zhou R, Wang J. Shap-
19. ing ability of four single-file systems in the instrumen- tation of second mesiobuccal canals of three-dimensional printed maxillary first molars. Ann Transl Med. 2021;9(18). doi:https://doi.org/10.21037/atm-21-3855.
20. 20. Grande NM, Plotino G, Gambarini G, Testarelli L, D’Ambrosio F, Pecci R, et al. Present and future in the use of micro-CT scanner 3D analysis for the study of dental and root canal mor- phology. Ann Ist Super Sanita. 2012;48:26–34. doi:https : //doi.org/10.4415/ann120105.
21. 21. Sousa VCd, Alencar AHGd, Bueno MR, Decurcio DdA, Estrela CRA, Estrela C. Evaluation in the danger zone of mandibu- lar molars after root canal preparation using novel CBCT soft- ware. Braz Oral Res. 2022;36. doi:https://doi.org/10.1590/1807- 3107bor-2022.vol36.0038.
22. 22. de Carvalho KKT, Petean IBF, Silva-Sousa AC, de Camargo RV, Mazzi-Chaves JF, Silva-Sousa YTC, et al. Impact of several NiTi-thermally treated instrumentation systems on biomechanical preparation of curved root canals in ex- tracted mandibular molars. Int Endod J. 2022;55(1):124–136. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.13649.
23. 23. Gambill JM, Alder M, del Rio CE. Comparison of nickel- titanium and stainless steel hand-file instrumentation us- ing computed tomography. J Endod. 1996;22(7):369–375. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/s0099-2399(96)80221-4.
24. 24. Gomes ILL, Alves FRF, Marceliano-Alves MF, Silveira SB, Provenzano JC, Gonçalves LS. Canal transportation using Mani GPR or HyFlex NT during the retreatment of curved root canals: A micro-computed tomographic study. Aust Endod J. 2021;47(1):73–80. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/aej.12470.
25. 25. Bürklein S, Börjes L, Schäfer E. Comparison of preparation of curved root canals with H yflex CM and R evo-S rotary nickel–titanium instruments. Int Endod J. 2014;47(5):470– 476. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.12171.
26. 26. Vakili-Gilani P, Tavanafar S, Saleh ARM, Karimpour H. Shaping ability of three nickel-titanium rotary instru- ments in simulated L-shaped canals: OneShape, Hero Shaper, and Revo-S. BMC Oral Health. 2021;21(1):1–7. doi:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-021-01734-6.
27. 27. Vallaeys K, Chevalier V, Arbab-Chirani R. Comparative anal- ysis of canal transportation and centring ability of three Ni–Ti rotary endodontic systems: Protaper, MTwo and Revo- S, assessed by micro-computed tomography. Odontology. 2016;104(1):83–88. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10266-014- 0176-z.
28. 28. Elsherief SM, Zayet MK, Hamouda IM. Cone-beam computed tomography analysis of curved root canals af- ter mechanical preparation with three nickel-titanium rotary instruments. J Biomed Res. 2013;27(4):326. doi:https://doi.org/10.7555/jbr.27.20130008.
29. 29. Moe MMK, Ha JH, Jin MU, Kim YK, Kim SK. Root canal shaping effect of instruments with offset mass of rota- tion in the mandibular first molar: a micro–computed tomographic study. J Endod. 2018;44(5):822–827. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2017.11.012.