A Kfir1, E Rosenberg, O Zuckerman, A Tamse, Z Fuss. 1. Department of Endodontology, The Maurice and Gabriela Goldschleger School of Dental Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Abstract
AIM: To compare procedural errors occurring during preparation of root canals by junior dental students in patients using a new '8-step method' versus traditional 'serial step-back technique. METHODOLOGY: Junior dental students treated 291 root canals of maxillary and mandibular teeth in patients. A new '8-step method' was used to prepare 149 canals, whilst the traditional 'serial step-back technique' was used for 142 root canals. Instrumentation was carried out in both techniques using standardized stainless steel K-files and coronal flaring with Gates-Glidden reamers. In the apical one-third, a filing motion was used in the traditional technique: with the '8-step method,' reaming or filing motions were used in sizes up to 25 and only reaming in sizes larger than 25. All root canals were obturated with gutta-percha points and AH26 using a lateral condensation technique. Pre- and postoperative radiographs were made of each tooth. Procedural errors were recorded and statistically analysed using a binomic test for comparison of proportion. RESULTS: Significantly (P < (1.0001) more root canals maintained their original shape with no deviation (91%) with the'8-step method' compared to the traditional 'serial step-back technique' (61%). The procedural errors detected with the'8-step method' consisted of 10 canals with transportation (5%) and five with root perforations (2%); there were no canal obstructions. With the 'serial step-back technique: significantly (P < 0.0001) more errors occurred: 28 canals were transported (17%), 10 had root perforations (7%), and 16 canals were obstructed (6%). The differences in maintaining the original root canal shape between the two methods were significantly greater in molar versus anterior teeth. CONCLUSIONS: The new '8-step method' resulted in fewer procedural errors than the traditional 'serial step-back technique' when junior students prepared root canals in patients.
AIM: To compare procedural errors occurring during preparation of root canals by junior dental students in patients using a new '8-step method' versus traditional 'serial step-back technique. METHODOLOGY: Junior dental students treated 291 root canals of maxillary and mandibular teeth in patients. A new '8-step method' was used to prepare 149 canals, whilst the traditional 'serial step-back technique' was used for 142 root canals. Instrumentation was carried out in both techniques using standardized stainless steel K-files and coronal flaring with Gates-Glidden reamers. In the apical one-third, a filing motion was used in the traditional technique: with the '8-step method,' reaming or filing motions were used in sizes up to 25 and only reaming in sizes larger than 25. All root canals were obturated with gutta-percha points and AH26 using a lateral condensation technique. Pre- and postoperative radiographs were made of each tooth. Procedural errors were recorded and statistically analysed using a binomic test for comparison of proportion. RESULTS: Significantly (P < (1.0001) more root canals maintained their original shape with no deviation (91%) with the'8-step method' compared to the traditional 'serial step-back technique' (61%). The procedural errors detected with the'8-step method' consisted of 10 canals with transportation (5%) and five with root perforations (2%); there were no canal obstructions. With the 'serial step-back technique: significantly (P < 0.0001) more errors occurred: 28 canals were transported (17%), 10 had root perforations (7%), and 16 canals were obstructed (6%). The differences in maintaining the original root canal shape between the two methods were significantly greater in molar versus anterior teeth. CONCLUSIONS: The new '8-step method' resulted in fewer procedural errors than the traditional 'serial step-back technique' when junior students prepared root canals in patients.
Authors: Ronaldo Araújo Souza; João Costa Pinto Dantas; Paula Maciel Brandão; Suely Colombo; Maurício Lago; Marco Antônio Húngaro Duarte Journal: Eur J Dent Date: 2012-10