Comparative evaluation of surface characteristics of dentinal walls with and without using plastic finishing file

Abstract

Aim:The aim of this in vitro research is to evaluate the debris present on the dentinal walls after instrumentation in mesiobuccal root of maxillary molar with Hand Protapers, Hand Profiles, Hand Hero Shapers, and finishing the dentinal walls with and without rotary plastic files using stereomicroscope.Materials and Methods:Sixty freshly extracted human maxillary first molar teeth were divided into two groups of 30 teeth each (group A and B). Both the groups were divided into three subgroups of 10 teeth each (group A had subgroups A1, A2, and A3) and (group B had subgroups B1, B2 and B3). In group A, all the 30 canals were subjected to cleaning and shaping with three different instruments system and kept unfinished. This group was named as unfinished group. In group B, all the 30 canals were subjected to cleaning and shaping with three different instruments system followed by finishing with plastic files. This group was named as finished group. The crown of each tooth was sectioned at the cementoenamel junction. Canals were prepared following conventional principles of crown down technique. After splitting the roots longitudinally, the dentinal debris of each root canal was evaluated in three areas (coronal, middle and apical thirds of the root) by means of numerical evaluation scale, using a stereomicroscope.Results:Stereomicroscopic evaluations showed that there was no significant difference in the debris scores between the subgroups when the canals were instrumented with hand Protaper, hand Profile and hand Hero Shaper in all the thirds. There was no significant difference in scores between the unfinished group and the finished group in the coronal third but significant differences were seen in middle third and apical third.Conclusions:After instrumentation with different hand instruments, the use of plastic finishing files showed cleaner canal walls.

Comparison of dentinal damage induced by different nickel-titanium rotary instruments during canal preparation: An in vitro study

“…Stainless steel hand instruments clean the canals superficially and have also been shown to create canal aberrations, such as ledges, perforations, zips, and elbows. [ 3 ] But hand instrumentation does not appear to induce much damage to root canal wall. As in this study, instrumentation with hand files did not demonstrate damage to the root canal wall.…”

“…Stainless steel root canal instruments clean the canal superficially and can create canal aberrations such as ledges, zips, and elbows. [ 3 ] To eliminate these shortcomings of stainless steel instruments, nickel-titanium (Ni-Ti) instruments have been developed.…”

Cutting efficiency of four different rotary nickel: Titanium instruments

“…[ 21 22 ] This complex anatomy may be considered as one of the main challenges in controlling the root canal infection, because the pulp tissue as well as the root dentin may conceal toxins and microorganisms, compromising the final result of endodontic treatment. [ 23 ] The use of endodontic irrigant solutions and ultrasound agitation,[ 24 ] or even the association of endodontic instruments[ 25 ] are ways that may improve the cleaning of roots that have a complex anatomy.…”