Advertisement

Influence of Contracted Endodontic Access on Root Canal Geometry: An In Vitro Study

Published:January 12, 2018DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2017.11.010

      Highlights

      • The contracted endodontic access group showed a higher number of pecking motions required to reach the working length.
      • The centroid shift in the contracted endodontic cavity group was higher than in the traditional endodontic cavity group at the apical level.
      • A traditional endodontic access may be suggested to preserve the original root canal anatomy during shaping.

      Abstract

      Introduction

      Contracted endodontic cavities (CECs) have developed from the concept of minimally invasive dentistry and provide an alternative to traditional endodontic cavities (TECs). They have been designed in an effort to preserve the mechanical stability of teeth. The contracted cavity design preserves more of the dentin but may influence the geometric shaping parameters. The aim of this micro–computed tomographic study was to evaluate the influence of contracted endodontic cavities on the preservation of the original root canal anatomy after shaping with nickel-titanium rotary instruments.

      Methods

      Thirty extracted human mandibular molars with fully formed apices and independent mesial canals were randomly assigned to group 1 (TEC) and group 2 (CEC). Each group was shaped using ProGlider (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland) and WaveOne Gold (Dentsply Maillefer). Irrigation was performed with 10% EDTA and 5% sodium hypochlorite. Samples were scanned before and after canal shaping to match canal volumes (SkyScan; Bruker microCT, Kontich, Belgium [100 kV, 100 μA, and 15-μm resolution]), and images were analyzed to evaluate canal volumes, surface areas, and centroid shift on cross sections at −1 mm and −3 mm from the apex.

      Results

      TECs showed a greater preservation of the original root canal anatomy with less apical transportation than CECs, possibly because of the absence of coronal interferences and, therefore, fewer pecking motions required to complete instrumentation.

      Conclusions

      Within the limitations of this study, TECs may lead to a better preservation of the original canal anatomy during shaping compared with CECs, particularly at the apical level.

      Key Words

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Journal of Endodontics
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Christie W.H.
        • Thompson G.K.
        The importance of endodontic access in locating maxillary and mandibular molar canals.
        J Can Dent Assoc. 1994; 60: 527-536
        • Weller R.N.
        • Hartwell G.
        The impact of improved access and searching techniques on detection of the mesiolingual canal in maxillary molars.
        J Endod. 1989; 15: 82
        • Bòveda C.
        • Kishen A.
        Contracted endodontic cavities: the foundation for less invasive alternatives in the management of apical periodontitis.
        Endod Topics. 2015; 33: 169-186
        • Yuan K.
        • Niu C.
        • Xie Q.
        • et al.
        Comparative evaluation of the impact of minimally invasive preparation vs. conventional straight-line preparation on tooth biomechanics: a finite element analysis.
        Eur J Oral Sci. 2016; 124: 591-596
        • Murdoch-Kinch C.A.
        • McLean M.E.
        Minimally invasive dentistry.
        J Am Dent Assoc. 2003; 134: 87-95
        • Gutmann J.L.
        Minimally invasive dentistry (Endodontics).
        J Conserv Dent. 2013; 16: 282-283
        • Naumann M.
        Restorative procedures: effect on the mechanical integrity of root-filled teeth.
        Endod Topics. 2015; 33: 73-86
        • Zelic K.
        • Vukicevic A.
        • Jovicic G.
        • et al.
        Mechanical weakening of devitalized teeth: three-dimensional finite element analysis and prediction of tooth fracture.
        Int Endod J. 2015; 48: 850-863
        • Haapasalo M.
        • Shen Y.
        Evolution of nickel-titanium instruments: from past to future.
        Endod Topics. 2013; 29: 3-17
        • Burklein S.
        • Schafer E.
        Critical evaluation of root canal transportation by instrumentation.
        Endod Topics. 2013; 29: 110-124
        • Elnaghy A.M.
        • Elsaka S.E.
        Evaluation of root canal transportation, centering ratio, and remaining dentin thickness associated with ProTaper Next instruments with and without glide path.
        J Endod. 2014; 40: 2053-2056
        • Gambill J.M.
        • Alder M.
        • del Rio C.E.
        Comparison of nickel-titanium and stainless steel hand-file instrumentation using computed tomography.
        J Endod. 1996; 22: 369-375
        • Jafarzadeh H.
        • Abbott P.V.
        Ledge formation: review of a great challenge in endodontics.
        J Endod. 2007; 33: 1155-1162
        • Shen Y.
        • Cheung G.
        Methods and models to study nickel-titanium instruments.
        Endod Topics. 2013; 29: 18-41
        • Peters O.A.
        Current challenges and concepts in the preparation of root canal systems: a review.
        J Endod. 2004; 30: 559-567
        • Loizides A.L.
        • Kakavetsos V.D.
        • Tzanetakis G.N.
        • et al.
        A comparative study of the effects of two nickel-titanium preparation techniques on root canal geometry assessed by microcomputed tomography.
        J Endod. 2007; 33: 1455-1459
        • Alovisi M.
        • Cemenasco A.
        • Mancini L.
        • et al.
        Micro-CT evaluation of several glide path techniques and ProTaper Next shaping outcomes in maxillary first molar curved canals.
        Int Endod J. 2017; 50: 387-397
        • Schneider S.W.
        A comparison of canal preparations in straight and curved root canals.
        Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1971; 32: 271-275
        • Gu Y.
        • Lu Q.
        • Wang P.
        • Ni L.
        Root canal morphology of permanent three-rooted mandibular first molars: part II–measurement of root canal curvatures.
        J Endod. 2010; 36: 1341-1346
        • Eaton J.A.
        • Clement D.J.
        • Lloyd A.
        • Marchesan M.A.
        Micro-computed tomographic evaluation of the influence of root canal system landmarks on access outline forms and canal curvatures in mandibular molars.
        J Endod. 2015; 41: 1888-1891
        • Moore B.
        • Verdelis K.
        • Kishen A.
        • et al.
        Impacts of contracted endodontic cavities on instrumentation efficacy and biomechanical responses in maxillary molars.
        J Endod. 2016; 42: 1779-1783
        • Krishan R.
        • Paqu e F.
        • Ossareh A.
        • et al.
        Impacts of conservative endodontic cavity on root canal instrumentation efficacy and resistance to fracture assessed in incisors, premolars, and molars.
        J Endod. 2014; 40: 1160-1166
        • Ingle J.I.
        Endodontic cavity preparation.
        in: Ingle J. Tamber J. Endodontics. 3rd ed. Lea &Febiger, Philadelphia1985: 102-167
        • Patel S.
        • Rhodes J.
        A practical guide to endodontic access cavity preparation in molar teeth.
        Br Dent J. 2007; 203: 133-140
        • Cruz A.
        • Vera J.
        • Gascón G.
        • et al.
        Debris remaining in the apical third of root canals after chemomechanical preparation by using sodium hypochlorite and glyde: an in vivo study.
        J Endod. 2014; 40: 1419-1423
        • Pasqualini D.
        • Alovisi M.
        • Cemenasco A.
        • et al.
        Micro-computed tomography evaluation of ProTaper Next and BioRace shaping outcomes in maxillary first molar curved canals.
        J Endod. 2015; 41: 1706-1710
        • Versiani M.A.
        • Pécora J.D.
        • Sousa-Neto M.D.
        Microcomputed tomography analysis of the root canal morphology of single-rooted mandibular canines.
        Int Endod J. 2013; 46: 800-807
        • Neves A.A.
        • Silva E.J.
        • Roter J.M.
        • et al.
        Exploiting the potential of free software to evaluate root canal biomechanical preparation outcomes through micro-CT images.
        Int Endod J. 2015; 48: 1033-1042
        • Krasner P.
        • Rankow H.J.
        Anatomy of the pulp-chamber floor.
        J Endod. 2004; 30: 5-16
        • Pereira J.
        • McDonald A.
        • Petrie A.
        • Knowles J.
        Effect of cavity design on tooth surface strain.
        J Prosthet Dent. 2013; 110: 369-375
        • Reeh E.S.
        • Messer H.H.
        • Douglas W.H.
        Reduction in tooth stiffness as a result of end- odontic and restorative procedures.
        J Endod. 1989; 15: 512-516
        • Plotino G.
        • Grande N.M.
        • Isufi A.
        • et al.
        Fracture strength of endodontically treated teeth with different access cavity designs.
        J Endod. 2017; 43: 995-1000
        • Al-Nuaimi N.
        • Patel S.
        • Austin R.S.
        • Mannocci F.
        A prospective study assessing the effect of coronal tooth structure loss on the outcome of root canal retreatment.
        Int Endod J. 2017; 50: 1143-1157
        • Özyürek T.
        • Yılmaz K.
        • Uslu G.
        Shaping ability of Reciproc, WaveOne GOLD, and HyFlex EDM single-file systems in simulated S-shaped canals.
        J Endod. 2017; 43: 805-809
        • Harris S.P.
        • Bowles W.R.
        • Fok A.
        • McClanahan S.B.
        An anatomic investigation of the mandibular first molar using micro-computed tomography.
        J Endod. 2013; 39: 1374-1378
        • Adıgüzel M.
        • Capar I.D.
        Comparison of cyclic fatigue resistance of WaveOne and WaveOne Gold Small, Primary, and Large Instruments.
        J Endod. 2017; 43: 623-627