In vitro comparison of post-instrumentation preparation to identify pericervical dentin wear in mesial canals of mandibular molars
https://doi.org/10.36377/ET-0192
Abstract
AIM. The present study aimed to compare the level of wear in the pericervical dentin of the mesial canal of the first mandibular molar using two types of endodontic file systems.
MATERIALS AND METHODS. 30 extracted human first mandibular molars were selected and divided into two groups of 15 teeth randomly to which an initial CT was performed. Group 1 was prepared with the Rotate NiTi file system and for group 2 the Endogal system was used. After the preparation of canals, a final CT was taken and the respective measurements were made comparing the beginning and end. Intergroup comparison was performed with independent t tests.
RESULTS. No statistically significant differences were found between the two groups of files with a value of 1.64 mm for Endogal and 1.92 mm for Rotate.
CONCLUSIONS. It is concluded that the pericervical dentin was preserved by conserving its anatomy, when using the two types of rotary file systems for the preparation of the root canals.
About the Authors
M. J. Burbano-Balseca
University of the Hemispheres
Ecuador
Competing Interests:
Ecuador
Maria José Burbano-Balseca – Professor, Department of Health Sciences
Quito, Pichincha, Ecuador
Competing Interests:
The authors declare no conflict of interests.
D. R. Aguilhar-Ochoa
University of the Hemispheres
Ecuador
Competing Interests:
Ecuador
Diego René Aguilhar-Ochoa – Student, Department of Health Sciences
Quito, Pichincha, Ecuador
Competing Interests:
The authors declare no conflict of interests.
K.M.S. Freitas
Ingá University Center (UNINGÁ)
Brazil
Competing Interests:
Brazil
Karina Maria Salvatore Freitas – Professor, Department of Orthodontics
Maringa, Paraná, Brazil
Competing Interests:
The authors declare no conflict of interests.
M. Aguirre-Balseca
University of the Hemispheres
Ecuador
Competing Interests:
Ecuador
Mauricio Aguirre-Balseca – Professor, Department of Health Sciences
Quito, Pichincha, Ecuador
Competing Interests:
The authors declare no conflict of interests.
References
1. Aydın Z.U., Keskin N.B., Özyürek T., Geneci F., Ocak M., Çelik H.H. Microcomputed assessment of transportation, centering ratio, canal area, and volume increase after single-file rotary and reciprocating glide path instrumentation in curved root canals: a laboratory study. J Endod. 2019;45(6):791–796. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2019.02.012
2. Chaudhary N.R., Singh D.J., Somani R., Jaidka S. Comparative evaluation of efficiency of different file systems in terms of remaining dentin thickness using cone-beam computed tomography: an in vitro study. Contemp Clin Dent. 2018;9(3):367–371. https://doi.org/10.4103/ccd.ccd_72_18
3. Shantiaee Y., Dianat O., Paymanpour P., Nahvi G., Ketabi M.A., Kolahi Ahari G. Alterations of the danger zone after preparation of curved root canals using waveone with reverse rotation or reciprocation movements. Iran Endod J. 2015;10(3):156–161. https://doi.org/10.7508/iej.2015.03.002
4. Xu F., Zhang Y., Gu Y., Ping Y., Zhou R., Wang J. Shaping ability of four single-file systems in the instrumentation of second mesiobuccal canals of three-dimensional printed maxillary first molars. Ann Transl Med. 2021;9(18):1425. https://doi.org/10.21037/atm-21-3855
5. Aguiar C.M., Andrade Mendes D., Câmara A.C., Figueiredo J.A. Evaluation of the centreing ability of the ProTaper Universal rotary system in curved roots in comparison to Nitiflex files. Aust Endod J. 2009;35(3):174–179. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-4477.2009.00168.x
6. Drukteinis S., Peciuliene V., Dummer P.M.H., Hupp J. Shaping ability of BioRace, ProTaper NEXT and Genius nickel-titanium instruments in curved canals of mandibular molars: a MicroCT study. Int Endod J. 2019;52(1):86–93. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.12961
7. Aguiar C.M., Sobrinho P.B., Teles F., Câmara A.C., Figueiredo J.A. Comparison of the centring ability of the ProTaper™ and ProTaper Universal™ rotary systems for preparing curved root canals. Aust Endod J. 2013;39(1):25–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-4477.2010.00276.x
8. Pagliosa A., Sousa-Neto M.D., Versiani M.A., Raucci-Neto W., Silva-Sousa Y.T., Alfredo E. Computed tomography evaluation of rotary systems on the root canal transportation and centering ability. Braz Oral Res. 2015;29(1):1–7. https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-3107BOR-2015.vol29.0039
9. Capar I.D., Ertas H., Ok E., Arslan H., Ertas E.T. Comparative study of different novel nickel-titanium rotary systems for root canal preparation in severely curved root canals. J Endod. 2014;40(6):852–856. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2013.10.010
10. Sousa-Neto M.D., Silva-Sousa Y.C., Mazzi-Chaves J.F., Carvalho K.K.T., Barbosa A.F.S., Versiani M.A. et al. Root canal preparation using micro-computed tomography analysis: a literature review. Braz Oral Res. 2018;32(Suppl. 1):e66. https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-3107bor-2018.vol32.0066
11. Nekkanti H., Enuganti S., Avula J.S., Kakarla P., Siva S.K., Gavarraju D.N. Assessment of biomechanical preparation influence on various root canal curvatures. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2024;17(2):130–135. https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10005-2760
12. AlOmari T., Mustafa R., Al-Fodeh R., El-Farraj H., Khaled W., Jamleh A. Debris extrusion using reciproc blue and xp endo shaper systems in root canal retreatment. Int J Dent. 2021;2021:6697587. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/6697587
13. Sivas Yilmaz Ö., Keskin C., Aydemir H. Comparison of the torsional resistance of 4 different glide path instruments. J Endod. 2021;47(6):970–975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2021.02.009
14. Kulkarni N.R., Kamat S.B., Hugar S.I., Nanjannawar G.S., Patil P.D. Evaluation of remaining dentin thickness following use of three different rotary nickel-titanium retreatment files: A cone-beam computed tomography study. J Conserv Dent. 2019;22(6):588–592. Available at: https://journals.lww.com/jcde/fulltext/2019/22060/evaluation_of_remaining_dentin_thickness_following.17.aspx (accessed: 13.03.2026).
15. Shyma P., Mathew J., George L., Vineet R.V., Paul S., Joy A. Comparative evaluation of pericervical dentin preservation and fracture resistance of root canal-treated teeth with rotary endodontic file systems of different types of taper – An in vitro study. J Conserv Dent Endod. 2023;26(4):429–433. Available at: https://journals.lww.com/jcde/fulltext/2023/26040/comparative_evaluation_of_pericervical_dentin.12.aspx (accessed: 13.03.2026).
16. Aguiar C.M., Mendes D.A., Câmara A.C., Figueiredo A.P. Assessment of canal walls after biomechanical preparation of root canals instrumented with Protaper Universal rotary system. J Appl Oral Sci. 2009;17(6):590–595. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1678-77572009000600010
17. Zinge P.R., Patil J. Comparative evaluation of effect of rotary and reciprocating single-file systems on pericervical dentin: A cone-beam computed tomography study. J Conserv Dent. 2017;20(6):424–428. Available at: https://journals.lww.com/jcde/fulltext/2017/20060/comparative_evaluation_of_effect_of_rotary_and.10.aspx (accessed: 13.03.2026).
18. Olivier J.G., García-Font M., Gonzalez-Sanchez J.A., Roig-Cayon M., Durán-Sindreu F. Danger zone analysis using cone beam computed tomography after apical enlargement with K3 and K3XF in a manikin model. J Clin Exp Dent. 2016;8(4):e361–e367. https://doi.org/10.4317/jced.52523
Review
For citations:
Burbano-Balseca M.J., Aguilhar-Ochoa D.R., Freitas K., Aguirre-Balseca M. In vitro comparison of post-instrumentation preparation to identify pericervical dentin wear in mesial canals of mandibular molars. Endodontics Today. 2026;24(2):308-312. https://doi.org/10.36377/ET-0192
Email this article 