Apical debris extrusion during instrumentation with continuous and reciprocating systems
Rev. Cient. CRO-RJ (Online)
;
6(2): 40-44, 2021.
Article
in English
| LILACS, BBO
| ID: biblio-1357524
ABSTRACT
Objective:
to evaluate the amount of apical debris extrusion during root canal preparation using continuous and reciprocating systems. Material andMethods:
Forty lower incisors were selected and randomly divided into four groups (n=10) for root canal preparation. Two multifile systems with continuous rotation (iRace® and Mtwo®) and two reciprocating single-file systems (Reciproc® and WaveOne®) were used. In the iRace® group, the R1 (15/.06), R2 (25/.04) and R3 (30/.04) instruments were used. In the Mtwo® group, the 10/.04, 15/.05, 20/.06, and 25/.06 instruments were used. In the Reciproc® and WaveOne® groups, the R25 and 25/.04 instruments were used, respectively. Apical debris extrusion was determined by calculating the difference between the pre- and post-instrumentation weight of the Eppendorf tubes. Statistical analysis was performed using the analysis of variance (ANOVA) test with the Bonferroni correction (p<0.05).Results:
The iRace® group demonstrated significantly more apical extrusion than the Reciproc® group (p<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between the Mtwo®, Reciproc®, and WaveOne® groups (p>0.05).Conclusion:
All of the evaluated systems produced apical debris extrusion. The iRace® system produced more apical debris extrusion than the Reciproc® system, and there was no difference observed in this regard between the Mtwo®, Reciproc®, and WaveOne® systems.RESUMO
Objetivo:
avaliar a quantidade de debris extruidos apicalmente durante o preparo do canal radicular usando sistemas de rotação contínua e reciprocante.Materiais e Métodos:
Quarenta incisivos inferiores foram selecionados e randomicamente divididos em quatro grupos (n=10) para o preparo do canal radicular. Dois sistemas de limas múltiplas de rotação contínua (iRace® e Mtwo®) e dois sistemas de limas únicas reciprocantes (Reciproc® e WaveOne®) foram usados. No grupo iRace®, foram utilizados os instrumentos R1 (15/.06), R2 (25/.04) e R3 (30/.04). No grupo Mtwo®, foram utilizados os instrumentos 10/.04, 15/.05, 20/.06, 25/.06. Nos grupos Reciproc® e WaveOne®, foram utilizados os instrumentos R25 e 25.04, respectivamente. A extrusão apical de debris foi calculada pela diferença entre os pesos dos tubos Eppendorf antes e após a instrumentação. A análise estatística foi feita usando o teste de análise de variância (ANOVA) seguida do teste de Bonferroni (p<0,05).Resultados:
O grupo iRace® demonstrou significativamente mais extrusão quando comparado ao Reciproc (p<0,05). Não houve diferença estatisticamente significativa entre os grupos Mtwo®, Reciproc®, e WaveOne® (p>0,05).Conclusão:
Todos os sistemas avaliados produziram extrusão apical de debris. O Sistema iRace® produziu mais extrusão apical de debris do que o Sistema Reciproc® e não foi observada diferença entre os sistemas Mtwo®, Reciproc® e WaveOne®.
Full text:
Available
Index:
LILACS (Americas)
Main subject:
Endodontics
Type of study:
Controlled clinical trial
Language:
English
Journal:
Rev. Cient. CRO-RJ (Online)
Journal subject:
Medicina Cl¡nica
/
Odontologia
/
Patologia
Year:
2021
Type:
Article
Affiliation country:
Brazil
Institution/Affiliation country:
Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro - UERJ/BR
Similar
MEDLINE
...
LILACS
LIS