Background: Root canal cleaning is a key step in the endodontic treatment of the primary molars. An innovative generation of endodontic instruments has been devised with the aim of emerging better procedures. The objective of the study is to assess the preparation of time, the risk of lateral perforation, and the removal of dentin from Kedo-S and Mtwo rotary instruments on primary teeth.
Study design: This is an in vitro experimental study comparing the two groups.
Materials and methods: A total of 50 extracted mandibular primary first molars are collected, divided randomly into two groups of 25 teeth each. Group I: Kedo-S Pediatric rotary file, Group II: Mtwo rotary file. Distal canal is standardized for evaluation and teeth are sectioned at the CEJ. The teeth were instrumented according to manufacturer's guideline. Both the groups are scanned before and after instrumentation of the canal using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and values are evaluated.
Results: Compared with Mtwo files, Kedo-S files need less instrumentation time and limited lateral perforation. No statistical differences were reported between the instrumentation of Kedo-S and Mtwo with regard to the amount of dentin removed.
Conclusion: In pediatric endodontics, Kedo-S pediatric rotary file can be considered an effective alternative to traditional rotary files because it requires less instrumentation time and preserves dentin thickness.
Pinkham JR, Casamassimo PS. Pediatric dentistry Infancy through adolescence. 4th ed. Philadelphia, PA: WB Saunders Co; 2005; pp. 390.
Barr ES, Kleier DJ, Barr NV. Use of nickel-titanium rotary files for root canal preparation in primary teeth. Pediatr Dent 1999 Nov-Dec; 21(7):453–454. PMID: 10633522.
Nazari Moghaddam K, Mehran M, Farajian Zadeh H. Root canal cleaning efficacy of rotary and hand files instrumentation in primary molars. Iran Endod J. 2009 spring; 4(2):53–57. Epub 2009 Apr 17. PMID: 23940486; PMCID: PMC3740130.
Fumes AC, Sousa-Neto MD, Leoni GB, et al. Root canal morphology of primary molars: a micro-computed tomography study Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 2014; 15:317–326. DOI: 10.1007/s40368-014-0117-0
Jeevanandan G. Kedo-S paediatric rotary files for root canal preparation in primary teeth—case report. J Clin Diagn Res 2017;11(3):ZR03-ZR05. DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2017/25856.9508
Sonntag D, Ott M, Kook K, et al. Root canal preparation with the NiTi systems K3, Mtwo and Pro Taper Aust Endod J 2007;33(2):73–81. DOI: 10.1111/j.1747-4477.2007.00062.x
Kuzekanani M, Walsh L, Yousefi MA. Cleaning and shaping curved root canals: Mtwo vs Protaper instruments, a lab comparison. Indian J Dent Res 2009;20:268–270. DOI: 10.4103/0970-9290.57355
Schäfer E, Erler M, Dammaschke T. Comparative study on the shaping ability and cleaning efficiency of rotary Mtwo instruments: Part 1: Shaping ability in simulated curved canals. Int Endod J 2006; 39(3):196–202. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2006.01074.x. PMID: 16507073.
Schäfer E, Erler M, Dammaschke T. Comparative study on the shaping ability and cleaning efficiency of rotary Mtwo instruments: Part 2: Cleaning effectiveness and shaping ability in severely curved root canals of extracted teeth Int Endod J 2006;39(3):203–212. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2006.01074.x
Reuben J, Velmurugan N, Kandaswamy D. The evaluation of root canal morphology of the mandibular first molar in an Indian population using spiral computed tomography scan: an in vitro study J Endod 2008;34(2):212–215. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2007.11.018
Ash, MM, Nelson, SJ. Wheeler's dental anatomy, physiology and occlusion. 9th ed. Philadelphia, PA: W.B. Saunders. 2009; pp-63.
Seema T, Ahammed H, Parul S, et al. Comparative evaluation of dentin removal and taper of root canalpreparation of Hand K File, ProTaper Rotary File, and Kedo-S Rotary File in primary molars using cone-beam computed tomography. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2020;13(4):332–336. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1787
Musale PK, Jain KR, Kothare SS. Comparative assessment of dentin removal following hand and rotary instrumentation in primary molars using cone-beam computed tomography. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2019;37(1):80–86. DOI: 10.4103/JISPPD.JISPPD_210_18
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
Hartmann MS, Barletta FB, Camargo Fontanella VR, et al. Canal transportation after root canal instrumentation: a comparative study with computed tomography. J Endod 2007; 33:962–965. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2007.03.019
Prabhakar AR, Yavagal C, Dixit K, et al. Reciprocating vs rotary instrumentation in pediatric endodontics: cone beam computed tomographic analysis of deciduous root canals using two single-file systems. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2016;9(1):45–49. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1332
Panchal V, Jeevanandan G, Subramanian EM. Comparison of instrumentation time and obturation quality between hand K–file, H–files, and rotary Kedo–S in root canal treatment of primary teeth: a randomized controlled trial. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2019; 37:75–79. DOI: 10.4103/JISPPD.JISPPD_72_18
Govindaraju L, Jeevanandan G, Subramanian EMG, et al. Assessment of quality of obturation, instrumentation time and intensity of pain with pediatric rotary file (Kedo-S) in primary anterior teeth: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2018;11(6):462–467. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1558
Selvakumar H, Kavitha S, Thomas E, et al. Computed tomographic evaluation of K3 rotary and stainless steel K File instrumentation in primary teeth. J Clin Diagn Res 2016;10(1):ZC05–ZC08. DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2016/14183.7028
Zameer M. Evaluation of radicular dentin remaining and risk of perforation after manual and rotary instrumentations in root canals of primary teeth: an in vitrostudy J Pediatr Dent 2016; 4(3):57–65. DOI: 10.4103/2321-6646.194370