[Home ] [Archive]    
:: Main :: About :: Current Issue :: Archive :: Search :: Submit :: Contact ::
:: Volume 3, Issue 3 (Journal of Research in Dental & Maxillofacial Sciences Summer 2018) ::
J Res Dentomaxillofac Sci 2018, 3(3): 1-8 Back to browse issues page
Comparison of Canal Transportation and Centering Ability of Wave One and SafeSider in Curved Root Canals Using Cone-Beam Computed Tomography
N Nazarian1, M Abbasi * 2, SH Sakhdari3, S Ghannad4
1- Dentist, Tehran, Iran.
2- Assistant Professor, Endodontics Dept, Faculty of Dentistry, Tehran Medical Sciences, , ma_8498@yahoo.com
3- Assistant Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry,, Islamic Azad University of Medical Sciences, Dental Branch, Tehran, Iran.
4- Assistant Professor, Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Tehran Medical Sciences,, Islamic Azad University of Medical Sciences, Dental Branch, Tehran, Iran.
Abstract:   (420 Views)
Background and Aim: Maintaining the original central canal path during cleaning and shaping of the root canal system plays an important role in the success of endodontic treatment. This study sought to compare canal transportation and centering ability of WaveOne and SafeSider rotary files using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT).
Materials and Methods: This in-vitro, experimental study was conducted on 40 mesiobuccal canals of extracted human mandibular first molars with 20° to 40° of curvature. The teeth were randomly divided into two groups (n=20) and mounted in putty. Next, preoperative CBCT scans were obtained. Root canals were prepared using primary file of WaveOne in group A and SafeSider system up to file #25/0.04 taper in group B. Postoperative CBCT scans were taken and cross-sectional images at 1, 3, and 7 mm distances from the anatomic apex were compared. Data were analyzed using t-test and two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA).
Results: WaveOne was significantly superior to SafeSider regarding the canal centering ability and caused significantly less canal transportation (P<0.001). The canal centering ability of both systems was higher at the coronal and middle thirds of the root compared to the apical region (P<0.05).
Conclusion: WaveOne, in contrast to SafeSider, has optimal canal centering ability and less transportation in curved root canals. 
Keywords: Root Canal Preparation, Cone-Beam Computed Tomography, Rotary instruments, Wave One, Safe Side
Full-Text [PDF 162 kb]   (115 Downloads) |   |   Full-Text (HTML)  (52 Views)  
Type of Study: Original article | Subject: Radiology
* Corresponding Author Address: Islamic Azad University of Medical Sciences, Dental Branch, Tehran, Iran.
1. Schilder H. Cleaning and shaping the root canal. Dent Clin North Am. 1974 Apr;18(2):269-96.
2. Abou-Rass M, Frank AL, Glick DH. The anticurvature filing method to prepare the curved root canal. J Am Dent Assoc. 1980 Now;101(5):792-4.
3. Guelzow A, Stamm O, Martus P, Kielbassa AM. Comparative study of six rotary nickel-titanium systems and hand instrumentation for root canal preparation. Int Endod J. 2005 Oct;38(10):743-52.
4. Ceyhanli KT, Erdilek N, Tatar I, Cetintav B. Comparative micro-computed tomography evaluation of apical root canal transportation with the use of ProTaper, RaCe and Safesider systems in human teeth. Aust Endod J. 2014 Apr;40(1):12-6.
5. Gluskin AH, Brown DC, Buchanan LS. A reconstructed computerized tomographic comparison of Ni-Ti rotary GT files versus traditional instruments in canals shaped by novice operators. Int Endod J. 2001 Sep;34(6):476-84.
6. Pruett JP, Clement DJ, Carnes DL, Jr. Cyclic fatigue testing of nickel-titanium endodontic instruments. J Endod. 1997 Feb;23(2):77-85.
7. Haikel Y, Serfaty R, Bateman G, Senger B, Allemann C. Dynamic and cyclic fatigue of engine-driven rotary nickel-titanium endodontic instruments. J Endod. 1999 Jun;25(6):434-40.
8. You SY, Bae KS, Baek SH, Kum KY, Shon WJ, Lee W. Lifespan of one nickel-titanium rotary file with reciprocating motion in curved root canals. J Endod. 2010 Dec;36(12):1991-4.
9. De-Deus G, Moreira EJ, Lopes HP, Elias CN. Extended cyclic fatigue life of F2 ProTaper instruments used in reciprocating movement. Int Endod J. 2010 Dec;43(12):1063-8.
10. Rhodes SC, Hulsmann M, McNeal SF, Beck P, Eleazer PD. Comparison of root canal preparation using reciprocating Safesiders stainless steel and Vortex nickel-titanium instruments. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2011 May;111(5):659-67.
11. You SY, Kim HC, Bae KS, Baek SH, Kum KY, Lee W. Shaping ability of reciprocating motion in curved root canals: a comparative study with micro-computed tomography. J Endod. 2011 Sep;37(9):1296-300.
12. Yared G. Canal preparation using only one Ni-Ti rotary instrument: preliminary observations. Int Endod J. 2008 Apr;41(4):339-44.
13. Tofangchiha M, Adel M, Bakhshi M, Esfehani M, Nazeman P, Ghorbani Elizeyi M, et al. Digital radiography with computerized conventional monitors compared to medical monitors in vertical root fracture diagnosis. Iran Endod J. 2013 Winter;8(1):14-7.
14. Webber J, Machtou P, Pertot W, Kuttler S, Ruddle C, West J. The WaveOne single-file reciprocating system. Roots. 2011;1(1):28-33.
15. Musikant BL, Cohen BI, Deutsch AS. Comparison instrumentation reamers and files versus a flat-sided design of conventional noninterrupted, flat-sided design. J Endod. 2004 Feb;30(2):107-9.
16. Sydney GB, Batista A, de Melo LL. The radiographic platform: a new method to evaluate root canal preparation in vitro. J Endod. 1991 Nov;17(11):570-2.
17. Peters OA, Peters CI, Schonenberger K, Barbakow F. ProTaper rotary root canal preparation: effects of canal anatomy on final shape analysed by micro CT. Int Endod J. 2003 Feb;36(2):86-92.
18. Hartmann MS, Barletta FB, Camargo Fontanella VR, Vanni JR. Canal transportation after root canal instrumentation: a comparative study with computed tomography. J Endod. 2007 Aug;33(8):962-5.
19. Bernardes RA, Rocha EA, Duarte MA, Vivan RR, de Moraes IG, Bramante AS, et al. Root canal area increase promoted by the EndoSequence and ProTaper systems: comparison by computed tomography. J Endod. 2010 Jul;36(7):1179-82.
20. Madani Z, Soleymani A, Bagheri T, Moudi E, Bijani A, Rakhshan V. Transportation and Centering Ability of Neoniti and ProTaper Instruments; A CBCT Assessment. Iran Endod J. 2017 Winter;12(1):43-9.
21. Khademi A, Yazdizadeh M, Feizianfard M. Determination of the minimum instrumentation size for penetration of irrigants to the apical third of root canal systems. J Endod. 2006 May;32(5):417-20.
22. Berutti E, Chiandussi G, Paolino DS, Scotti N, Cantatore G, Castellucci A, et al. Canal shaping with WaveOne Primary reciprocating files and ProTaper system: a comparative study. J Endod. 2012 Apr;38(4):505-9.
23. Gambill JM, Alder M, del Rio CE. Comparison of nickel-titanium and stainless steel hand-file instrumentation using computed tomography. J Endod. 1996 Jul;22(7):369-75.
24. Bramante CM, Berbert A, Borges RP. A methodology for evaluation of root canal instrumentation. J Endod. 1987 May;13(5):243-5.
25. Barthel CR, Gruber S, Roulet JF. A new method to assess the results of instrumentation techniques in the root canal. J Endod. 1999 Aug;25(8):535-8.
26. Gergi R, Rjeily JA, Sader J, Naaman A. Comparison of canal transportation and centering ability of twisted files, Pathfile-ProTaper system, and stainless steel hand K-files by using computed tomography. J Endod. 2010 May;36(5):904-7.
27. Estrela C, Bueno MR, Sousa-Neto MD, Pécora JD. Method for determination of root curvature radius using cone-beam computed tomography images. Braz Dent J. 2008;19(2):114-8.
28. Hashem AA, Ghoneim AG, Lutfy RA, Foda MY, Omar GA. Geometric analysis of root canals prepared by four rotary NiTi shaping systems. J Endod. 2012 Jul;38(7):996-1000.
29. Özer SY. Comparison of root canal transportation induced by three rotary systems with noncutting tips using computed tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2011 Feb;111(2):244-50.
30. Freire LG, Gavini G, Branco-Barletta F, Sanches-Cunha R, dos Santos M. Microscopic computerized tomographic evaluation of root canal transportation prepared with twisted or ground nickel-titanium rotary instruments. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2011 Dec;112(6):e143-8.
31. Taşdemir T, Aydemir H, Inan U, Unal O. Canal preparation with Hero 642 rotary Ni-Ti instruments compared with stainless steel hand K-file assessed using computed tomography. Int Endod J. 2005 Jun;38(6):402-8.
32. Schneider SW. A comparison of canal preparations in straight and curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1971 aug;32(2):271-5.
33. Paqué F, Barbakow F, Peters OA. Root canal preparation with Endo-Eze AET: changes in root canal shape assessed by micro-computed tomography. Int Endod J. 2005 Jul;38(7):456-64.
34. Frank AL. An evaluation of the Giromatic endodontic handpiece. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1967 Sep;24(3):419-21.
35. Hülsmann M, Schade M, Schafers F. A comparative study of root canal preparation with HERO 642 and Quantec SC rotary Ni-Ti instruments. Int Endod J. 2001 Oct;34(7):538-46.
36. Abu-Al Shawareb SA, Saeed MH, Al Hadi DZ. The shaping ability of two reciprocating file systems in s-shaped simulated root canals. Int J Recent Sci Res. 2016;7(11):14222-9.
37. Roane JB, Sabala CL, Duncanson MG Jr. The "balanced force" concept for instrumentation of curved canals. J Endod. 1985 May;11(5):203-11.
38. Southard DW, Oswald RJ, Natkin E. Instrumentation of curved molar root canals with the Roane technique. J Endod. 1987 Oct;13(10):479-89.
39. Roane JB, Sabala C. Clockwise or counterclockwise. J Endod. 1984 Aug;10(8):349-53.
40. Paqué F, Zehnder M, De-Deus G. Microtomography-based comparison of reciprocating single-file F2 ProTaper technique versus rotary full sequence. J Endod. 2011 Oct;37(10):1394-7.
41. De-Deus G, Barino B, Zamolyi RQ, Souza E, Fonseca A Jr., Fidel S, et al. Suboptimal debridement quality produced by the single-file F2 ProTaper technique in oval-shaped canals. J Endod. 2010 Nov;36(11):1897-900.
42. Wu MK, Fan B, Wesselink PR. Leakage along apical root fillings in curved root canals. Part I: effects of apical transportation on seal of root fillings. J Endod. 2000 Apr;26(4):210-6.
43. Delgoshayi N, Abbasi M, Bakhtiar H, Sakhdari S, Ghannad S, Ellini MR. Canal Transportation and Centering Ability of ProTaper and SafeSider in Preparation of Curved Root Canals: A CBCT Evaluation. Iran Endod J. 2018 Spring;13(2):240-5.
Send email to the article author

Add your comments about this article
Your username or Email:


XML     Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Nazarian N, Abbasi M, Sakhdari S, Ghannad S. Comparison of Canal Transportation and Centering Ability of Wave One and SafeSider in Curved Root Canals Using Cone-Beam Computed Tomography. J Res Dentomaxillofac Sci. 2018; 3 (3) :1-8
URL: http://jrdms.dentaliau.ac.ir/article-1-208-en.html

Volume 3, Issue 3 (Journal of Research in Dental & Maxillofacial Sciences Summer 2018) Back to browse issues page
Journal of Research in Dental and Maxillofacial Sciences
Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.06 seconds with 31 queries by YEKTAWEB 3925