International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 12 , ISSUE 5 ( September-October, 2019 ) > List of Articles


Rotary Endodontics in Pediatric Dentistry: Embracing the New Alternative

Keywords : Deciduous teeth, Pulpectomy, Rotary endodontics, Rotary files

Citation Information : Rotary Endodontics in Pediatric Dentistry: Embracing the New Alternative. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2019; 12 (5):460-463.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1679

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 00-10-2019

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2019; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Pulpectomy is one of the most important procedures in maintaining the necrotic primary teeth until physiologic exfoliation. In clinical practice, time efficacy is invaluable, especially in pediatric endodontics, where unpredictability and difficulty of root canal morphology adds to a clinician\'s challenge. The success of a pulpectomy procedure mainly depends upon the biomechanical preparation of the root canal systems. With the advent of NiTi rotary files, adult endodontic procedures have been rendered easy, but its popularity in pedodontic practice is limited. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to review the use of NiTi rotary files for root canal instrumentation in primary teeth.

PDF Share
  1. Farhin K, Devendra P, et al. Application of Rotary Instrumentation in Paediatric Endodontics – A Review. Int J Prev Clin Dent Res 2014;1(3):48–52.
  2. George S, Anandaraj S, et al. Rotary endodontics in primary teeth – A review. Saudi Dent J 2016;28:12–17. DOI: 10.1016/j.sdentj.2015.08.004.
  3. Moghaddam KN, Mehran M, et al. Root canal cleaning efficacy of rotary and hand files instrumentation in primary molars. Iran Endod J 2009;4(2):53–57.
  4. Barr ES, Kleier DJ, et al. Use of nickel titanium rotary files for root canal preparation in primary teeth. Pediatr Dent 2000;22:77–78.
  5. Ochoa-Romero T, Mendez-Gonzalez V, et al. Comparison between rotary and manual techniques on duration of instrumentation and obturation times in primary teeth. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2011;35(4): 359–363. DOI: 10.17796/jcpd.35.4.8k013k21t39245n8.
  6. Kuo CI, Wang YL, et al. Application of Ni-Ti rotary files for pulpectomy in primary molars. J Dent Sci 2006;1:10–15.
  7. Silva LA, Leonardo MR, et al. Comparison of rotary and manual instrumentation techniques on cleaning capacity and instrumentation time indeciduous molars. J Dent Child 2004;71:45–47.
  8. Dey B, Jana S, et al. A Comparison of Ni-Ti Rotary and Hand Files Instrumentation in Primary Teeth – A Review Article. Int J Oral Health Med Res 2016;3(2):59–62.
  9. Walsch H. The hybrid concept of nickel–titanium rotary instrumentation. Dent Clin N Am 2004;48:183–202. DOI: 10.1016/j.cden.2003.11.003.
  10. Finn SB. Morphology of primary teeth, 4th ed.; 1973. pp. 59–70.
  11. Nagaratna PJ, Shashikiran ND, et al. In vitro comparison of NiTi rotary instruments and stainless steel hand instruments in root canal preparations of primary and permanent molar. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2006;24:186–191. DOI: 10.4103/0970-4388.28075.
  12. Azar MR, Safi L, et al. Comparison of the cleaning capacity of Mtwo and ProTaper rotary systems and manual instruments in primary teeth. Dent Res J 2012;9(2):146–151. DOI: 10.4103/1735-3327.95227.
  13. Pinheiro SL, Neves LS, et al. Analysis of the instrumentation time and cleaning between manual and rotary techniques in deciduous molars. RSBO 2012;9(3):238–244.
  15. Hsu Y-Y. The ProFile system. Dent Clin N Am 2004;48:69–85.
  16. Crespo S, Cortes O, et al. Comparison between rotary and manual instrumentation in primary teeth. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2008;32: 295–298. DOI: 10.17796/jcpd.32.4.l57l36355u606576.
  17. Canoglu C, Tekcicek MU, et al. Comparison of Conventional, Rotary, and Ultrasonic Preparation, Different Final Irrigation Regimens, and 2 Sealers in Primary. Molar Root Canal Therapy 2006;28(6):518–523.
  18. Ruddle CJ. The ProTaper technique. Endodontic Topics 2005;10: 187–190. DOI: 10.1111/j.1601-1546.2005.00115.x.
  19. Clauder T, Baumann MA. ProTaper NT system. Dent Clin N Am 2004;48:87–111. DOI: 10.1016/j.cden.2003.10.006.
  20. Pinheiro SL, Araujo G, et al. Evaluation of cleaning capacity and instrumentation time of manual, hybrid and rotary instrumentation techniques in primary molars. Int Endod J 2012;45(4):379–385. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2011.01987.x.
  21. Sonntag D. FlexMaster: A universal system. Endodontic Topics 2005;10:183–186. DOI: 10.1111/j.1601-1546.2005.00120.x.
  22. Bahrololoomi Z, Tabrizizadeh M, et al. In Vitro Comparison of Instrumentation Time and Cleaning Capacity between Rotary and Manual Preparation Techniques in Primary Anterior Teeth. J Dent Tehran Univ Med Sci 2007;4(2):59–62.
  23. Makarem A, Ravandeh N, et al. Radiographic assessment and chair time of rotary instruments in the pulpectomy of primary second molar teeth: a randomised controlled clinical trial. J Dent Res Clin Dent Prospect 2014;8:84–89.
  24. Calas P. HERO Shapers: The adapted pitch Concept. Endodontic Topics 2005;10:155–162. DOI: 10.1111/j.1601-1546.2005.00118.x.
  25. Kummer TR, Calvo MC, et al. Ex vivo study of manual and rotary instrumentation techniques in human primary teeth. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2008;105:84–92. DOI: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2007.12.008.
  26. Ozen B, Akgun OM. A Comparison of Ni-Ti Rotary and Hand Files Instrumentation in Primary Molars. J Int Dent. Med Res 2013;6(1): 6–8.
  27. Malagino VA, Grande NM, et al. The Mtwo NiTi rotary system for root canal preparation. Roots 2006;3:67–70.
  28. Azar MR, Mokhtare M. Rotary Mtwo system versus manual K-file instruments: Efficacy in preparing primary and permanent molar root canals. Indian J Dent Res 2011;22(2):363. DOI: 10.4103/0970-9290.84283.
  29. Mounce RE. The K3 rotary nickel–titanium file system. Dent Clin N Am 2004;48:137–157. DOI: 10.1016/j.cden.2003.11.002.
  30. Gambarini G. The K3 rotary nickel titanium instrument system. Endodontic Topics 2005;10:179–182. DOI: 10.1111/j.1601-1546.2005.00119.x.
  31. Rosa FM, Modesto A, et al. Manual and rotary instrumentation techniques for root canal preparation in primary molars. 2014;2:1–5.
  32. Barbakow F. The LightSpeed System. Dent Clin N Am 2004;48:113–135. DOI: 10.1016/j.cden.2003.10.003.
  33. Vieyra JP, Enriquez FJ. Instrumentation Time Efficiency of Rotary and Hand Instrumentation Performed on Vital and Necrotic Human Primary Teeth: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Dentistry 2014;4:214.
  34. Musale PK, Mujawar SA. Evaluation of the efficacy of rotary versus hand files in root canal preparation of primary teeth in vitro using CBCT. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 2014;15:113–120. DOI: 10.1007/s40368-013-0072-1.
  35. Madan N, Rathnam A, et al. K-file vs ProFiles in cleaning capacity and instrumentation time in primary molar root canals: An in vitro study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2011;29:2–6. DOI: 10.4103/0970-4388.79907.
  36. Katge F, Patil D, et al. Comparison of instrumentation time and cleaning efficacy of manual instrumentation, rotary systems and reciprocating systems in primary teeth: an vitro study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2014;32:311–316. DOI: 10.4103/0970-4388. 140957.
  37. Elmsallati EA, Wadachi R, et al. Debris retention and wear in three different nickel-titanium rotary instruments. Aust Endod J 2006;32:107–111. DOI: 10.1111/j.1747-4477.2006.00029.x.
  38. Yoshimine Y, Ono M, et al. The shaping effects of three nickel-titanium rotary instruments in simulated S-shaped canals. J Endod 2005;31:373–375. DOI: 10.1097/01.don.0000140568.40462.43.
  39. Fayyad DM, Elgendy AAE. Cutting efficiency of twisted vs machined nickel-titanium endodontic files. J Endod 2011;37(8):1143–1146. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2011.03.036.
  40. Prabhakar AR, Yavagal C, et al. Twisted vs Protaper Files in Contemporary Pediatric Endodontics. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2014;7(2):93–96. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1244.
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.