C G Adorno1, T Yoshioka, H Suda. 1. Pulp Biology and Endodontics, Graduate School, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Tokyo, Japan. c.adorno.endo@tmd.ac.jp
Abstract
AIM: To evaluate the effects of working length and root canal preparation technique on crack development in the apical root canal wall. METHODOLOGY: Seventy extracted mandibular premolars were mounted in a resin block with simulated periodontal ligaments and divided into seven groups according to preparation technique and working length: group A, step-back preparation with stainless steel files with working length set at the apical foramen and defined as root canal length (CL); group B, same as for A, except that the working length was CL-1 mm; group C, crown-down preparation with Profile instruments followed by an apical enlargement sequence with CL as working length and group D, same as for C, except that the working length was CL-1 mm. Groups E, F and G served as controls. Groups E and F were prepared only with the crown-down sequence up to CL and CL-1 mm, respectively. Group G was left unprepared. Digital images of the apical root surface (AS) were recorded before preparation, immediately after instrumentation and after removing the apical 1 mm (AS-1 mm) and 2 mm (AS-2 mm) of the root end. RESULTS: Working length significantly affected crack development at AS (P < 0.05). Preparation technique significantly affected crack development at AS-1 mm (P < 0.05). At AS-2 mm, there was no significant difference between preparation technique and working length in terms of crack development on the canal wall. CONCLUSION: Root canal preparation alone, regardless of the technique used, can potentially generate cracks on the apical root canal wall as well as the apical surface. Working 1- mm short of the apical foramen might produce fewer cracks in the apical region.
AIM: To evaluate the effects of working length and root canal preparation technique on crack development in the apical root canal wall. METHODOLOGY: Seventy extracted mandibular premolars were mounted in a resin block with simulated periodontal ligaments and divided into seven groups according to preparation technique and working length: group A, step-back preparation with stainless steel files with working length set at the apical foramen and defined as root canal length (CL); group B, same as for A, except that the working length was CL-1 mm; group C, crown-down preparation with Profile instruments followed by an apical enlargement sequence with CL as working length and group D, same as for C, except that the working length was CL-1 mm. Groups E, F and G served as controls. Groups E and F were prepared only with the crown-down sequence up to CL and CL-1 mm, respectively. Group G was left unprepared. Digital images of the apical root surface (AS) were recorded before preparation, immediately after instrumentation and after removing the apical 1 mm (AS-1 mm) and 2 mm (AS-2 mm) of the root end. RESULTS: Working length significantly affected crack development at AS (P < 0.05). Preparation technique significantly affected crack development at AS-1 mm (P < 0.05). At AS-2 mm, there was no significant difference between preparation technique and working length in terms of crack development on the canal wall. CONCLUSION: Root canal preparation alone, regardless of the technique used, can potentially generate cracks on the apical root canal wall as well as the apical surface. Working 1- mm short of the apical foramen might produce fewer cracks in the apical region.