Periapical and endodontic status scale based on periapical bone lesions and endodontic treatment quality evaluation using cone-beam computed tomography.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to present a new periapical and endodontic status scale (PESS) that is based on the complex periapical index (COPI), which was designed for the identification and classification of periapical bone lesions in cases of apical periodontitis, and the endodontically treated tooth index, which was designed for endodontic treatment quality evaluation by means of cone-beam computed tomographic (CBCT) analysis. METHODS: Periapical and endodontic status parameters were selected from the already known indexes and scientific literature for radiologic evaluation. Radiographic images (CBCT imaging, digital orthopantomography [DOR], and digital periapical radiography) from 55 patients were analyzed. All parameters were evaluated on CBCT, DOR, and digital periapical radiographic images by 2 external observers. The statistical analysis was performed with software SPSS version 19.0 (SPSS Inc, Chicago, IL). Chi-square tests were used to compare frequencies of qualitative variables. The level of significance was set at P ≤ .05. RESULTS: Overall intraobserver and interobserver agreements were very good and good, respectively. CBCT analysis found more lesions and lesions of bigger dimension (P < .001). CBCT imaging was also superior in locating lesions in the apical part on the side compared with DOR and in the diagnosis of cortical bone destruction compared with both methods (P < .001). Through CBCT analysis, more root canals and more canals associated with lesions were found. The most informative and reproducible periapical and endodontic status parameters were selected, and a new PESS was proposed. CONCLUSIONS: The classification proposed in the present study seems to be reproducible and objective and adds helpful information with respect to the existing indexes. Future studies need to be conducted to validate PESS.

Cyclic fatigue resistance of 3 different nickel-titanium reciprocating instruments in artificial canals.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the cyclic fatigue resistance of 3 different nickel-titanium reciprocating instruments. METHODS: A total of 45 nickel-titanium instruments were tested and divided into 3 experimental groups (n = 15): group 1, WaveOne Primary instruments; group 2, Reciproc R25 instruments; and group 3, Twisted File (TF) Adaptive M-L1 instruments. The instruments were then subjected to cyclic fatigue test on a static model consisting of a metal block with a simulated canal with 60° angle of curvature and a 5-mm radius of curvature. WaveOne Primary, Reciproc R25, and TF Adaptive instruments were activated by using their proprietary movements, WaveOne ALL, Reciproc ALL, and TF Adaptive, respectively. All instruments were activated until fracture occurred, and the time to fracture was recorded visually for each file with a 1/100-second chronometer. Mean number of cycles to failure and standard deviations were calculated for each group, and data were statistically analyzed (P < .05). Instruments were also observed through scanning electron microscopy to evaluate type of fracture. RESULTS: Cyclic fatigue resistance of Reciproc R25 and TF Adaptive M-L1 was significantly higher than that of WaveOne Primary (P = .009 and P = .002, respectively). The results showed no statistically significant difference between TF Adaptive M-L1 and Reciproc R25 (P = .686). Analysis of the fractured portion under scanning electron microscopy indicated that all instruments showed morphologic characteristics of ductile fracture that were due to accumulation of metal fatigue. CONCLUSIONS: No statistically significant differences were found between the instruments tested except for WaveOne Primary, which showed the lowest resistance to cyclic fatigue.

Cutting efficiency of instruments with different movements: a comparative study.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the cutting efficiency of two new reciprocating instruments, Twisted File Adaptive and WaveOne Primary. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 10 new Twisted File Adaptive (TF Adaptive) (SybronEndo, Glendora, CA, USA) and 10 new WaveOne Primary files (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland) were activated using a torque-controlled motor, respectively TFA motor (SybronEndo, Glendora, CA, USA) and Silver motor (VDW, Munich, Germany). The device used for the cutting test consisted on a mainframe to which a mobile plastic support for the hand-piece is connected and a stainless-steel block containing a Plexiglas block against which the cutting efficiency of the instruments was tested. The length of the block cut in 1 minute was measured in a computerized program with a precision of 0.1 mm. Mean and standard deviations of each group were calculated and data were statistically analyzed with one-way ANOVA and Bonferroni t test (P < 0.05). RESULTS: TF Adaptive displayed significantly greater maximum penetration depth than WaveOne Primary (P < 0.05). In fact, TF Adaptive instruments (Group 1) cut the Plexiglas block to a mean depth of 8.7 (SD 0.5) mm, while WaveOne Primary instruments cut the Plexiglas block to a mean depth of 6.4 (SD 0.3) mm. CONCLUSIONS: Twisted File Adaptive instruments demonstrated statistically higher cutting efficiency than WaveOne instruments.

Influence of Different Apical Preparations on Root Canal Cleanliness in Human Molars: a SEM Study.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the influence of type and dimensions of the apical preparation on the cleanliness of the apical area in molars. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 120 root canals (MB and DB root canals from 30 maxillary molars and mesial root canals from 30 mandibular molars) were instrumented with Mtwo NiTi rotary instruments to a size 25/0.06 taper and were equally divided into three different experimental groups depending on the subsequently apical root canal preparation: Group 1: no further apical preparation, Group 2: apical preparation with Mtwo files to a size 40/0.04 taper, Group 3: apical preparation with Mtwo Apical Files. All root canals were observed through scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Presence of superficial debris and smear layer was evaluated using a score system. Data were statistically analysed using the Kruskal-Wallis and Bonferroni tests with a level of significance set at P < 0.05. RESULTS: Kruskal-Wallis test revealed no differences among groups in the middle and coronal third (P > 0.05), while at the apical level, there was a significant difference for both residual debris and presence of smear layer between Group 1 and both Group 2 (P = 0.003 and P = 0.014) and 3 (P = 0.012 and P = 0.021), while no difference was present between Group 2 and Group 3 (P = 0.871 and P = 0.923). CONCLUSIONS: Cleanliness of the apical third in terms of debris and smear layer was statistically better when an apical preparation was performed to a size 40/0.04 taper or with the use of the Mtwo Apical Files.

Symmetry of root and root canal morphology of maxillary and mandibular molars in a white population: a cone-beam computed tomography study in vivo.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of the present study was to use cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) to analyze root canal anatomy and symmetry of maxillary and mandibular first and second molar teeth of a white population. METHODS: A total of 201 patients who required CBCT examinations as part of their dental diagnosis and treatment were enrolled in the present study. Overall, 596 healthy, untreated, well-developed maxillary and mandibular molar teeth (161 maxillary first molars, 157 maxillary second molars, 117 mandibular first molars, and 161 mandibular second molars) were examined by CBCT to establish the symmetry in root and canal anatomy between right and left sides in the same patient by evaluating the number of roots and root canals and the root canal configuration. RESULTS: Three separate roots with 3 separate canals was the normal anatomy of maxillary first and second molars. Most mandibular first and second molars had 2 separate roots, and the majority had 3 canals. In the present study, first molars, both maxillary and mandibular, exhibited greater asymmetry than the second molars. Maxillary first molars were found to be symmetrical in 71.1% of patients, whereas maxillary second molars were symmetrical in 79.6%. The remaining 28.9% and 20.4% of patients, respectively, showed asymmetry. Around 30% of the mandibular first molars and 20% of the mandibular second molars showed asymmetry. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the present study reported a percentage of symmetry that varied from 70%-81%. These variations in symmetry should be taken in high consideration when treating 2 opposite molars in the same patient, because their anatomy may be different in up to 30% of the cases.