Y Ghahramani1, N Mohammadi2, M Zangooei-Booshehri3, S Shirdel4. 1. Department of Endodontics, Shiraz Dental School, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran. 2. Oral and Dental Disease Research Center, Shiraz Dental School, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Qasrodasht St., Shiraz, 71956-15878, Iran. najme_mohammadi64@yahoo.com. 3. Oral and Maxillofacial Radiologist, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran. 4. Department of Paediatric Dentistry, Shiraz Dental School, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.
Abstract
PURPOSE: There is a clinical dilemma about root canal preparation for endodontic treatment of primary teeth. This study aimed to compare the amount of dentin removal in root canal treated primary molar teeth with three preparation techniques by cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). METHODS: A total of 39 s primary molar teeth were selected with a minimum of two-thirds of the entire root length. Access cavity was prepared and preliminary CBCT images were taken and viewed by Romexis programme. The wall thickness of the canal was measured in the danger zone at two axial cut sections of 1 and 2 mm below furcation. Then, the teeth were instrumented with three different methods as manual K-files (size 15-30), Gates glidden burs (in decreasing order of size #2 and #1 followed by hand k-files up to file number 25), and ProTaper rotary files. After canal preparation, the specimens were placed in the same position, and the canal wall thickness was remeasured. Data were analysed by using one-way ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis tests (α = 0.05). RESULTS: The amounts of removed dentin thickness was not significantly different among the three groups at two axial cut sections of 1 mm and 2 mm below furcation (P = 0.27 and 0.17, respectively). CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this study, the three instrumentation techniques used in primary molars were comparable regarding the amount of dentin removal.
PURPOSE: There is a clinical dilemma about root canal preparation for endodontic treatment of primary teeth. This study aimed to compare the amount of dentin removal in root canal treated primary molar teeth with three preparation techniques by cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). METHODS: A total of 39 s primary molar teeth were selected with a minimum of two-thirds of the entire root length. Access cavity was prepared and preliminary CBCT images were taken and viewed by Romexis programme. The wall thickness of the canal was measured in the danger zone at two axial cut sections of 1 and 2 mm below furcation. Then, the teeth were instrumented with three different methods as manual K-files (size 15-30), Gates glidden burs (in decreasing order of size #2 and #1 followed by hand k-files up to file number 25), and ProTaper rotary files. After canal preparation, the specimens were placed in the same position, and the canal wall thickness was remeasured. Data were analysed by using one-way ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis tests (α = 0.05). RESULTS: The amounts of removed dentin thickness was not significantly different among the three groups at two axial cut sections of 1 mm and 2 mm below furcation (P = 0.27 and 0.17, respectively). CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this study, the three instrumentation techniques used in primary molars were comparable regarding the amount of dentin removal.
Authors: Marco Antonio Hungaro Duarte; Ricardo Affonso Bernardes; Ronald Ordinola-Zapata; Bruno Carvalho de Vasconcelos; Clovis Monteiro Bramante; Ivaldo Gomes de Moraes Journal: Braz Dent J Date: 2011
Authors: Paula Barcellos da Silva; Simone Ferreti Duarte; Murilo Priori Alcalde; Marco Antonio Húngaro Duarte; Rodrigo Ricci Vivan; Ricardo Abreu da Rosa; Marcus Vinícius Reis Só; Angela Longo do Nascimento Journal: BMC Oral Health Date: 2020-04-16 Impact factor: 2.757