Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Reciprocating instrumentation in a maxillary primary central incisor: A protocol tested in a 3D printed prototype.
Moraes, Rafael Dos Reis; Santos, Thaís Maria Pires Dos; Marceliano-Alves, Marília Fagury; Pintor, Andreá Vaz Braga; Lopes, Ricardo Tadeu; Primo, Laura Guimarães; Neves, Aline de Almeida.
Affiliation
  • Moraes RDR; Department of Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
  • Santos TMPD; Laboratory for Nuclear Instrumentation, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
  • Marceliano-Alves MF; Department of Dental Clinics, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
  • Pintor AVB; Department of Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
  • Lopes RT; Laboratory for Nuclear Instrumentation, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
  • Primo LG; Department of Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
  • Neves AA; Department of Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Int J Paediatr Dent ; 29(1): 50-57, 2019 Jan.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30264472
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Efficient endodontic instrumentation of primary teeth is a challenge for paediatric dentists.

AIM:

To evaluate biomechanical outcomes of endodontic instrumentation with a reciprocating system in a polymer-prototyped primary maxillary central incisor.

DESIGN:

The specimen was systematically instrumented and micro-CT scanned before and after each file. The amount of debris, percentage of non-instrumented areas, removed dentin volume, and lower dentin thickness at specific points along the root canal were analyzed.

RESULTS:

A 10% increase in removed dentin volume was observed when R40 was compared to R25 (14.5% vs 4.2%). When comparing R50 with R40, this increase was only 3.4% (17.9% vs 14.5%). In the root cervical third, there was substantial reduction in dentin thickness with R50 (48.8%), followed by R40 (39.5%) and R25 (18.6%). There was no difference between R25 and R40 in the removal of dentin at the apical third (15.8%), while R50 resulted in 39.8% reduction in dentin thickness. Percentage of non-instrumented areas were the same for all files. Accumulated debris with R40 and R50 was the same (0.19 mm³) while for R25 was 0.11 mm³.

CONCLUSIONS:

The Reciproc® system was effective for instrumentation of a prototyped primary maxillary central incisor. The most suitable file for apical preparation was R40.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Tooth, Deciduous / Incisor Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Int J Paediatr Dent Journal subject: ODONTOLOGIA / PEDIATRIA Year: 2019 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Brazil

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Tooth, Deciduous / Incisor Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Int J Paediatr Dent Journal subject: ODONTOLOGIA / PEDIATRIA Year: 2019 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Brazil