International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 14 , ISSUE 4 ( July-August, 2021 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Evaluation of Quality of Obturation Using Two Different Rotary Files and Hand Files in Primary Teeth: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Neethu Ann Preethy, Erulappan M Subramanian

Keywords : Deciduous teeth, Hand K files, Obturation quality, Pediatric rotary files

Citation Information : Preethy NA, Subramanian EM. Evaluation of Quality of Obturation Using Two Different Rotary Files and Hand Files in Primary Teeth: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2021; 14 (4):471-474.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1990

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 29-10-2021

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2021; The Author(s).


Abstract

Aim and objective: To estimate the obturation quality and instrumentation time on comparing traditional hand files and two rotary file types during root canal instrumentation in deciduous molars. Materials and methods: Forty-five deciduous mandibular molars were taken and randomly allotted to three groups (n = 15). Group I: K-hand files, group II: ProTaper Gold rotary file, and group III: Kedo-SG Blue rotary files. Before and after root canal instrumentation, standardized digital radiography was taken and the instrumentation time was also noted. The recorded data were then subjected to statistical analysis utilizing SPSS Software version 22.0. To compare the instrumentation time and quality of obturation between the groups, a Chi-square test and ANOVA with the level of significance at 0.05 were employed. Results: There was no significant difference recorded with reference to the quality of obturation (p > 0.05). However, the difference was noticed to be statistically significant when the instrumentation time between the two rotary groups and the manual instrumentation groups was taken into account (p < 0.05). The rotary systems ProTaper Gold and Kedo-SG Blue exhibited a significantly less instrumentation time on comparing with that of the hand files. Conclusion: Concerning the quality of obturation, all three file groups demonstrated almost a similar performance. However, there was a significant difference noticed in the instrumentation time with the use of manual instrumentation in comparison to rotary instrumentation in deciduous teeth.


HTML PDF Share
  1. Crespo S, Cortes O, Garcia C, et al. Comparison between rotary and manual instrumentation in primary teeth. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2008;32(4):295–298. DOI: 10.17796/jcpd.32.4.l57l36355u606576.
  2. Bowen JL, Mathu-Muju KR, Nash DA, et al. Pediatric and general dentists’ attitudes toward pulp therapy for primary teeth. Pediatr Dent 2012;34(3):210–215.
  3. Endo MS, Ferraz CCR, Zaia AA, et al. Quantitative and qualitative analysis of microorganisms in root-filled teeth with persistent infection: monitoring of the endodontic retreatment. Eur J Dent 2013;7(3):302–309. DOI: 10.4103/1305-7456.115414.
  4. Silva LAB, Leonardo MR, Nelson-Filho P, et al. Comparison of rotary and manual instrumentation techniques on cleaning capacity and instrumentation time in deciduous molars. J Dent Child Chic Ill 2004;71(1):45–47.
  5. Manual and rotary instrumentation techniques for root canal preparation in primary molars | Rosa | Dentistry 3000 [Internet]. [cited 2019 Feb 21]. Available from: http://dentistry3000.pitt.edu/ojs/index.php/dentistry3000/article/view/19.
  6. Barr ES, Kleier DJ, Barr NV. Use of nickel-titanium rotary files for root canal preparation in primary teeth. Pediatr Dent 2000;22(1):77–78.
  7. Pinheiro SL, Araujo G, Bincelli I, 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.
  8. Govindaraju L, Jeevanandan G, Subramanian E. Clinical evaluation of quality of obturation and instrumentation time using two modified rotary file systems with manual instrumentation in primary teeth. J Clin Diagn Res JCDR 2017;11(9):ZC55–ZC58. DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2017/30069.10602.
  9. Azar MR, Safi L, Nikaein A. Comparison of the cleaning capacity of Mtwo and Pro Taper rotary systems and manual instruments in primary teeth. Dent Res J 2012;9(2):146–151. DOI: 10.4103/1735-3327.95227.
  10. Katge F, Chimata VK, Poojari M, et al. Comparison of cleaning efficacy and instrumentation time between rotary and manual instrumentation techniques in primary teeth: an in vitro study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2016;9(2):124–127. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1347.
  11. Ochoa-Romero T, Mendez-Gonzalez V, Flores-Reyes H, 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.
  12. Jeevanandan G. Kedo-S paediatric rotary files for root canal preparation in primary teeth – case report. J Clin Diagn Res JCDR 2017;11(3):ZR03–ZR05. DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2017/25856.9508.
  13. Kummer TR, Calvo MC, Cordeiro MMR, 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(4):e84–e92. DOI: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2007.12.008.
  14. Govindaraju L, Jeevanandan G, Subramanian EMG. Comparison of quality of obturation and instrumentation time using hand files and two rotary file systems in primary molars: a single-blinded randomized controlled trial. Eur J Dent 2017;11(3):376–379. DOI: 10.4103/ejd.ejd_345_16.
  15. Coll JA, Sadrian R. Predicting pulpectomy success and its relationship to exfoliation and succedaneous dentition. Pediatr Dent 1996;18(1):57–63.
  16. Fuks AB, Papagiannoulis L. Pulpotomy in primary teeth: review of the literature according to standardized criteria. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent Off J Eur Acad Paediatr Dent 2006;7(2):64–71. DOI: 10.1007/BF03320817discussion 72.
  17. Berutti E, Chiandussi G, Gaviglio I, et al. Comparative analysis of torsional and bending stresses in two mathematical models of nickel-titanium rotary instruments: ProTaper versus ProFile. J Endod 2003;29(1):15–19. DOI: 10.1097/00004770-200301000-00005.
  18. Berutti E, Negro AR, Lendini M, et al. Influence of manual preflaring and torque on the failure rate of ProTaper rotary instruments. J Endod 2004;30(4):228–230. DOI: 10.1097/00004770-200404000-00011.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.