Abstract

Objective: The purpose of the present In vitro study was to evaluate the amount of touched canal walls of the XP Shaper single file system as compared to One Shape single file system.

Methods: In this study, 16 human permanent mandibular first molars with single oval canaled distal roots were selected, then randomly and equally divided into 2 groups: Group 1 (XPS) and Group 2 (OS). The molars distal halves were separated, then mounted into epoxy resin blocks which were sectioned using ISOMET sectioning saw. The root sections were imaged with a stereomicroscope before and after instrumentation. Pre- and post-instrumentation scans were superimposed and evaluated using AutoCAD analytical software.

Results: The amount of touched canal walls results showed a statistically significant difference between Group 1 (XPS) and Group 2 (OS) in the coronal, middle and apical thirds (p<0.001). Likewise, the total amount of touched canal walls was significantly higher in Group 1 (XPS) than in Group 2 (OS) (p<0.001). Conclusion: XP Shaper seems to be superior to One Shape rotary file in addressing the 3-dimensional structure of the root canal space of oval canals.

Keywords: Oval Canals; XP Shaper; One Shape; Amount Of Touched Canal Walls; Autocadl; Stereomicroscope

References

1. Schilder H. “Cleaning and shaping the root canal”. Dental Clinics of North America 18 (1974): 269-296.
2. Busquim S., et al. “A micro-computed tomography evaluation of long-oval canal preparation using reciprocating or rotary systems”. International Endodontic Journal 48.10 (2015):1001-1006.
3. Lacerda MF., et al. “Cleaning and shaping oval canals with 3 Instrumentation systems: a correlative micro–computed tomographic and histologic study”. Journal of Endodontics 43.11 (2017): 1878-1884.
4. Yared G. “Canal preparation using only one Ni-Ti rotary instrument: preliminary observations”. International Endodontic Journal 41.4 (2008): 339-344.
5. Azim AA., et al. “XP Shaper, A Novel Adaptive Core Rotary Instrument: Micro–computed Tomographic Analysis of Its Shaping Abilities”. Journal of Endodontics 43.9 (2017):1532-1538.
6. Eid GE and Amin SA. “Changes in diameter, cross-sectional area, and extent of canal-wall touching on using 3 instrumentation techniques in long-oval canals”. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology, and Endodontology 112.5 (2011): 688-695.
7. Siqueira Jr JF and Rôças IN. “Clinical implications and microbiology of bacterial persistence after treatment procedures”. Journal of Endodontics 34.11 (2008): 1291-1301. 
8. Paqué F., et al. “Preparation of oval-shaped root canals in mandibular molars using nickel-titanium rotary instruments: a micro-computed tomography study”. Journal of Endodontics 36.4 (2010): 703-707.
9. Paqué F., et al. “Hard-tissue debris accumulation analysis by high- resolution computed tomography scans”. Journal of Endodontics 35.7 (2009):1044-1047.
10. Versiani MA., et al. “Micro– computed tomography study of oval-shaped canals prepared with the Self-adjusting File, Reciproc, WaveOne, and Protaper Universal systems”. Journal of Endodontics 39.8 (2013): 1060-1066.
11. Bramante CM., et al. “A methodology for evaluation of root canal instrumentation”. Journal of Endodontics 13.5 (1987): 243-245.
12. Câmara AS., et al. “Flexibility and torsional strength of ProTaper and ProTaper Universal rotary instruments assessed by mechanical tests”. Journal of Endodontics 35.1 (2009): 113-116.
13. Cabanillas C., et al. “Assessment using AutoCAD software of the preparation of dentin walls in root canals produced by 4 different endodontic instrument systems”. International Journal of Dentistry (2015).
14. Moorer WR and Wesselink PR. “Factors promoting the tissue dissolving capability of sodium hypochlorite”. International Endodontic Journal 15.4 (1982): 187-196.
15. Estrela C., et al. “Mechanism of action of sodium hypochlorite”. Brazilian Dental Journal 13.2 (2002): 113-117.
16. Van der Waal S., et al. “Free available chlorine concentration in sodium hypochlorite solutions obtained from dental practices and intended for endodontic irrigation: are the expectations true?”. Quintessence International 45.6 (2014).
17. Iqbal MK., et al. “Effect of modified Hedström files on instrumentation area produced by ProFile® instruments in oval canals”. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology, and Endodontology 98.4 (2004): 493-498.
18. Günday M., et al. “A comparative study of three different root canal curvature measurement techniques and measuring the canal access angle in curved canals”. Journal of Endodontics 31.11 (2005): 796-798.
19. Kim HC., et al. “Cyclic fatigue and torsional resistance of two new nickel-titanium instruments used in reciprocation motion: Reciproc versus Wave One”. Journal of Endodontics 38.4 (2012): 541-544.
20. Al-Manei KK and Al-Hadlaq SM. “Evaluation of the root canal shaping ability of two rotary nickel– titanium systems”. International Endodontic Journal 47.10 (2014): 974-979.
21. Özyürek T and Demiryürek EÖ. “Efficacy of different nickel-titanium instruments in removing gutta- percha during root canal retreatment”. Journal of Endodontics 42.4 (2016): 646-649.
22. Peters OA. “Current challenges and concepts in the preparation of root canal systems: a review”. Journal of Endodontics 30.8 (2004): 559-567.
23. Wu MK., et al. “Leakage along apical root fillings in curved root canals. Part I: effects of apical transportation on seal of root fillings”. Journal of Endodontics 26.4 (2000): 210-216.

Citation

Citation: Mahmoud Amr Saad Mohamed., et al. “Assessment of the Cleaning Ability of A Novel Adaptive Core Rotary Instrument XP Shaper Versus one Shape Rotary System in Extracted Human Permanent Mandibular Molars: A Randomized In vitro Study”.Acta Scientific Dental Sciences 4.2 (2020): 75-81.

Copyright

Copyright: © 2020 Mahmoud Amr Saad Mohamed., et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.