Comparative Evaluation of Cleaning Capacity and Efficiency of Kedo-S Pediatric Rotary Files, Rotary ProTaper, and Hand K Files in Primary Molar Pulpectomy
Sampanna Kalita, Nidhi Agarwal
Citation Information :
Kalita S, Agarwal N. Comparative Evaluation of Cleaning Capacity and Efficiency of Kedo-S Pediatric Rotary Files, Rotary ProTaper, and Hand K Files in Primary Molar Pulpectomy. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2021; 14 (3):383-387.
Aim and objective: To assess and compare the cleaning efficacy and instrumentation time of K files, ProTaper, and Kedo-S rotary files in primary molars.
Materials and methods: India ink was injected into 120 root canals of selected primary molars. The root canals were randomly and equally divided into three groups based on instrumentation technique: group I—K files, group II—ProTaper, and group III—Kedo-S. After instrumentation with respective method, the canals were cleared and observed under a stereomicroscope, the instrumentation time for each root canal was also measured with a stopwatch. Statistical analysis was done with one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and post hoc Bonferroni.
Result: Kedo-S rotary files performed significantly better cleaning of the canals in the coronal and middle third than ProTaper and K files (p = 0.0001). In the apical third, the difference between the two rotary systems was not significant. The time taken for instrumentation was lowest with Kedo-S followed by ProTaper and K files.
Conclusion: Kedo-S pediatric rotary system showed significantly better cleaning than ProTaper rotary system and K files in cleaning primary molar root canals.
Clinical relevance: The anatomy and morphology of primary teeth demand a specialized file system that will overcome the shortcomings of conventional biomechanical preparation. Kedo-S files, being exclusive pediatric rotary files, might prove to be a boon in primary canal preparation.
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.
Coll JA, Sadrian R. Predicting pulpectomy success and its relationship to exfoliation and succedaneous dentition. Pediat Dent 1996;18(1): 57–63.
Fuks AB. Pulp therapy for the primary dentition. In: Pinkham JR, Casamassimo PS, McTigue DJ, et al., ed. Pediatric dentistry: infancy through adolescence. 4th ed., Philadelphia: WB Saunders Co.; 2005. p. 390.
Kuo CI, Wang YL, Chang HH, et al. Application of NiTi rotary files for pulpectomy in primary molars. J Dent Sci 2006;1:10–15.
Crespo S, Cortes O, Garcia C, et al. Comparison between rotary and manual instrumentation in primary teeth. J Clin Paediatr Dent 2008;32(4):295–298. DOI: 10.17796/jcpd.32.4.l57l36355u606576.
Moghaddam KN, Mehran M, Zadeh HF. Root canal cleaning efficacy of rotary and hand files instrumentation in primary molars. IEJ 2009;4:53–57.
Vieyra JP, Enriquez FJJ. Instrumentation time efficiency of rotary and hand instrumentation performed on vital and necrotic human primary teeth- a randomised clinical trial. Dentistry 2014;4:214. DOI: 10.4172/2161-1122.1000214.
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(1):45–47.
Azar MR, Safi L, Nikaein A. 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.
Katge F, Patil D, Poojari M, et al. Comparison of instrumentation time and cleaning efficacy of manual instrumentation, rotary systems and reciprocating systems in primary teeth: an in vitro study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2014;32(4):311–316. DOI: 10.4103/0970-4388.140957.
Bahrololoomi Z, Tabrizizadeh M, Salmani L. 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;4:59–62.
Mhatre S, Bijle M, Patil S. A single visit pulpectomy using Sx rotary ProTaper file. World J Dentis 2012;3(4):368–371. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-1192.
Musale PK, Mujawar SA. Evaluation of the efficacy of rotary vs. hand files in root canal preparation of primary teeth in vitro using CBCT. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 2014;15(2):113–120. DOI: 10.1007/s40368-013-0072-1.
Nagaratna PJ, Shashikaran ND, Subhareddy VV. 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;4(4):186–191. DOI: 10.4103/0970-4388. 28075.
Jeevanandan G. Kedo-S paediatric rotary files for root canal preparation in primary teeth – case report. J Clin Diagnos Res 2017;11(3):03–05.
Panchal V, Jeevanandan G, Subramanian EMG. Comparison of instrumentation time and obturation quality between hand K-files, H-files, and rotary Kedo-S in root canal treatment of primary teeth: a randomized controlled trial. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2019;37(1):75–79. DOI: 10.4103/JISPPD.JISPPD_72_18.
Walsch H. The hybrid concept of nickel titanium rotary instrumentation. Dent Clin N Am 2004;48(1):183–202. DOI: 10.1016/j.cden.2003.11.003.
Stavileci M, Hoxha V, Görduysus Ö, et al. Evaluation of root canal preparation using rotary system and hand instruments assessed by micro computed tomography. Med Sci Monit Basic Res 2015;20((21):123–130. DOI: 10.12659/MSMBR.893950.
Jeevanandan G, Thomas E. Volumetric analysis of hand, reciprocating and rotary instrumentation technique in primary molars using spiral computed tomography: an vitro comparative study. Eur J Dent 2018;12(1). DOI: 10.4103/ejd.ejd_247_17.
Jeevanandan G, Govindaraju L. Clinical comparison of Kedo-S paediatric rotary files vs manual instrumentation for root canal preparation in primary molars: a double blinded randomised clinical trial. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 2018;19(4):273–278. DOI: 10.1007/s40368-018-0356-6.
The primary (deciduous) teeth, In: Ash MM, ed. Wheeler's dental anatomy, physiology and occlusion. 9th ed., Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders; 2010. pp. 45–66.
