Micro-CT comparison of XP-endo Finisher and passive ultrasonic irrigation as final irrigation protocols on the removal of accumulated hard-tissue debris from oval shaped-canals.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of the XP-endo Finisher instrument and passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI) as final irrigation protocols on the removal of accumulated hard-tissue debris (AHTD) from oval-shaped canals using micro-computed tomographic (micro-CT) analysis. METHODS: Twenty mandibular incisors were anatomically pair-matched based on similar morphological dimensions (length, volume, aspect ratio, and configuration) through micro-CT analysis, prepared with Reciproc R25 instrument, scanned again, and assigned to one of the two experimental groups (n = 10), according to the final irrigation protocol: XP-endo Finisher and PUI. After the final irrigation protocols, the specimens were rescanned and the registered datasets were examined to quantify the amount of AHTD. Data were statistically analyzed using Student's t test with a significance level of 5%. RESULTS: The final irrigation protocols were highly similar in terms of volumetric percentage reduction of AHTD (P = 1.000). CONCLUSIONS: XP-endo Finisher and PUI showed the same effectiveness on the removal of AHTD. None of the tested final irrigation protocols completely removed the AHTD from oval-shaped root canals. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: AHTD may be considered clinically relevant because it could harbor bacterial contents away from the disinfection procedures. Both final irrigation protocols were effective on the removal of AHTD.

Micro-computed Tomography Shaping Ability Assessment of the New Blue Thermal Treated Reciproc Instrument.

INTRODUCTION: The present study aimed to assess canal preparation outcomes achieved by the new Reciproc Blue instrument using micro-computed tomography technology. M-Wire Reciproc was used as a reference instrument for comparison. METHODS: Seven pair-matched mesial roots of mandibular molars presenting similar anatomic features of the canal (length, volume, surface area, and configuration) were selected after scanning procedures and assigned to 1 of the 2 groups according to the instrument used, M-Wire Reciproc and Reciproc Blue. After canal instrumentation, the specimens were rescanned, and the registered preoperative and postoperative datasets were examined to evaluate the percentages of removed dentin, untouched canal walls, and degree of canal transportation. Comparisons regarding the above outcomes between the 2 groups were done by using paired t test with the alpha-type set at 5%. RESULTS: Root canals prepared with conventional M-Wire Reciproc or Reciproc Blue were found to present similar shaping properties with no significant differences in the tested parameters. CONCLUSIONS: M-Wire Reciproc and Blue Reciproc presented similar shaping outcomes.