To Compare and Evaluate Rotary and Manual Techniques in Biomechanical Preparation of Primary Molars to Know Their Effects in Terms of Cleaning and Shaping Efficacy
Keywords :
Bacterial count, Biomechanical preparation, Clinical and radiographic success, Hand files, Kedo-S rotary files, Manual technique, Postoperative pain, Primary teeth, Quality of obturation, Rotary technique, Rotay-K flex files, Working time
Citation Information :
Moudgalya MS, Tyagi P, Tiwari S, Tiwari T, Umarekar P, Shrivastava S. To Compare and Evaluate Rotary and Manual Techniques in Biomechanical Preparation of Primary Molars to Know Their Effects in Terms of Cleaning and Shaping Efficacy. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2024; 17 (8):864-870.
Background: The introduction of the rotary file system for children was a revolution in the field of pediatric endodontics. These files are cost-effective and help in consistent obturations with shorter instrumentation time.
Aim: The present randomized controlled trial (RCT) was planned for a comparative evaluation of rotary and manual techniques in biomechanical preparation of primary molars to determine their effect in terms of cleaning and shaping efficacy, working time, quality of obturation, and postoperative pain.
Materials and methods: A randomized clinical trial study was conducted in 75 children aged 5–9 years requiring pulpectomy. Each tooth was randomly assigned to one of the three treatment groups: Kedo-S files, rotary K-Flex files, and hand instruments group.
Results: It was observed that Kedo-S files and rotary K-Flex files were more effective in cleaning and shaping of root canals compared to hand H/K files. The postbacterial count for hand files was higher compared to rotary files. Shorter working time was seen with rotary files (3.88–5.04 minutes) compared to hand files (15.68 minutes). Rotary files showed a reduced number of voids, with Kedo-S files in 92% of cases and rotary K-Flex files in 80% of cases. Apical seal and extent of fill were maximum with rotary files, having a grade C rating in 92% of cases. Kedo-S files and rotary K-Flex files showed a significant reduction in postoperative pain compared to hand files.
Conclusion: The present study showed a significant reduction in bacterial count, working time, quality of obturation, and postoperative pain with rotary files.
Pinkham JR, Casamassimo PS. Pediatric Dentistry: Infancy Through Adolescence, 4th edition. Philadelphia: WB Saunders Co; 2005. p. 390.
Ali SG, Mulay S, Palekar A, et al. Prevalence of and factors affecting post-obturation pain following single visit root canal treatment in Indian population: a prospective, randomized clinical trial. Contemp Clin Dent 2012;3:459–463. DOI: 10.4103/0976-237X.107440
Kuo C, Wang Y, Chang H, et al. Application of Ni-Ti rotary files for pulpectomy in primary molars. J Dent Sci 2006;1:10–15.
Silva LA, 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 2004;71:45–47.
Fuks AB. Pulp therapy for the primary dentition. In: Pinkham JR, Casamassimo PS, Fields HW Jr, McTigue DJ, Nowak A (Eds). Pediatric Dentistry: Infancy Through Adolescence, 5th edition. St Louis: Elsevier Saunders; 2013. pp. 331–351.
Guelzow A, Stamm O, Martus P, et al. Comparative study of six rotary nickel-titaniumsystems and hand instrumentation for root canal preparation. Int Endod J 2005;38:743–752. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2005.01010.x
Crespo S, Cortes O, Garcia C, 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
Khubchandani M, Baliga MS, Rawlani SS, et al. Comparative evaluation of different obturation techniques in primary molars: an in vivo study. Eur J Gen Dent 2017;6:42–47. DOI: 10.4103/2278-9626.198611
Ahlquist M, Henningsson O, Hultenby K, et al. The effectiveness of manual and rotary techniques in the cleaning of root canals: a scanning electron microscopy study. Int Endod J 2001;34:533–537. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.2001.00429.x
Tan BT, Messer HH. The quality of apical canal preparation using hand and rotary instruments with specific criteria for enlargement based on initial apical file size. J Endod 2002;28:658–664. DOI: 10.1097/00004770-200209000-00008
Mehlawat R, Kapoor R, Gandhi K, et al. Comparative evaluation of instrumentation timing and cleaning efficacy in extracted primary molars using manual and NiTi rotary technique – in vitro study. J Oral Biol Craniofac Res 2019;9(2):151–155. DOI: 10.1016/j.jobcr.2019.03.003
Finn SB (Eds). Morphology of primary teeth. Clinical Pedodontics, 4th edition. Philadelphia: Saunders Co; 1973. pp. 59–70.
Romero TO, Gonzalez VM. Comparison between rotary and manual techniques on duration of instrumentation and obturation times in primary teeth. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2011;35:359–363. DOI: 10.17796/jcpd.35.4.8k013k21t39245n8
Makarem A, Ravandeh N, Ebrahimi M. Radiographic assessment and chair time of rotary instruments in the pulpectomy of primary second molar teeth: a randomized controlled clinical trial. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects 2014;8:84–89. DOI: 10.5681/joddd.2014.015
Madan N, Rathnam A, Shigli AL, 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
Zuolo AS, Mello JE Jr, Cunha RS, et al. Efficacy of reciprocating and rotary techniques for removing filling material during root canal retreatment. Int Endod J 2013;46:947–953. DOI: 10.1111/iej.12085
Huang QL, Zhang XQ, Deng GZ, et al. SEM evaluation of canal cleanliness following use of ProTaper hand-operated rotary instruments and stainless steel K-files. Chin J Dent Res 2009;12:45–49.
Kadhom TH, Hashimi WN. A study to compare the efficiency of different instrumentation systems for cleaning oval-shaped root canals (an in vitro study). J Baghdad Coll Dent 2013;25:49–55.
Capar ID, Arslan H, Akcay M, et al. Effects of ProTaper Universal, ProTaper Next, and HyFlex instruments on crack formation in dentin. J Endod 2014;40:1482–1484. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2014.02.026
V VK. Comparison of the cleaning effectiveness of Mtwo and Protaper Next rotary systems in primary molar root canals: an in vitro study. Int J Appl Dent Sci 2016.
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 2017;11(9):ZC55–ZC58. DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2017/30069.10602
Ribeiro Madalena I. Assessment of extruded debris in primary molars comparing manual and reciprocating instrumentation. Pesq Bras Odontoped Clin Integr 2017;17(1):37–67.
Topçuoğlu G, Topçuoğlu HS, Delikan E, et al. Postoperative pain after root canal preparation with hand and rotary files in primary molar teeth. Pediatr Dent 2017;39(3):192–196.
Nair M, Jeevanandan G, R V, et al. Comparative evaluation of post-operative pain after pulpectomy with K-files, Kedo-S files, and Mtwo files in deciduous molars – a randomized clinical trial. Braz Dent Sci 2018;21(4). DOI: 10.14295/bds.2018.v21i4.1617
DiRenzo A, Gresla T, Johnson BR, et al. Postoperative pain after 1- and 2-visit root canal therapy. Oral Surg Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2002;93(5):605–610. DOI: 10.1067/moe.2002.121900
