Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics

The Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry (대한치과보존학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparative evaluation of the effectiveness of ultrasonic tips versus the Terauchi file retrieval kit for the removal of separated endodontic instruments

  • Pruthi, Preeti Jain (Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Maulana Azad Institute of Dental Sciences) ;
  • Nawal, Ruchika Roongta (Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Maulana Azad Institute of Dental Sciences) ;
  • Talwar, Sangeeta (Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Maulana Azad Institute of Dental Sciences) ;
  • Verma, Mahesh (Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Maulana Azad Institute of Dental Sciences)
  • Received : 2019.06.05
  • Accepted : 2019.11.05
  • Published : 2020.05.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to perform a comparative evaluation of the effectiveness of ultrasonic tips versus the Terauchi file retrieval kit (TFRK) for the removal of broken endodontic instruments. Materials and Methods: A total of 80 extracted human first mandibular molars with moderate root canal curvature were selected. Following access cavity preparation canal patency was established with a size 10/15 K-file in the mesiobuccal canals of all teeth. The teeth were divided into 2 groups of 40 teeth each: the P group (ProUltra tips) and the T group (TFRK). Each group was further subdivided into 2 smaller groups of 20 teeth each according to whether ProTaper F1 rotary instruments were fractured in either the coronal third (C constituting the PC and TC groups) or the middle third (M constituting the PM and TM groups). Instrument retrieval was performed using either ProUltra tips or the TFRK. Results: The overall success rate at removing the separated instrument was 90% in group P and 95% in group T (p > 0.05) The mean time for instrument removal was higher with the ultrasonic tips than with the TFRK (p > 0.05). Conclusion: Both systems are acceptable clinical tools for instrument retrieval but the loop device in the TFRK requires slightly more dexterity than is needed for the ProUltra tips.

Keywords

References

  1. Thompson SA. An overview of nickel-titanium alloys used in dentistry. Int Endod J 2000;33:297-310. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2591.2000.00339.x
  2. Andreasen G, Wass K, Chan KC. A review of superelastic and thermodynamic nitinol wire. Quintessence Int 1985;16:623-626.
  3. Wolcott S, Wolcott J, Ishley D, Kennedy W, Johnson S, Minnich S, Meyers J. Separation incidence of protaper rotary instruments: a large cohort clinical evaluation. J Endod 2006;32:1139-1141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2006.05.015
  4. Iqbal MK, Kohli MR, Kim JS. A retrospective clinical study of incidence of root canal instrument separation in an endodontics graduate program: a PennEndo database study. J Endod 2006;32:1048-1052. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2006.03.001
  5. Di Fiore PM, Genov KA, Komaroff E, Li Y, Lin L. Nickel-titanium rotary instrument fracture: a clinical practice assessment. Int Endod J 2006;39:700-708. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2006.01137.x
  6. Suter B, Lussi A, Sequeira P. Probability of removing fractured instruments from root canals. Int Endod J 2005;38:112-123. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2004.00916.x
  7. Ward JR. The use of an ultrasonic technique to remove a fractured rotary nickel-titanium instrument from the apical third of a curved root canal. Aust Endod J 2003;29:25-30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-4477.2003.tb00492.x
  8. Murad M, Murray C. Impact of retained separated endodontic instruments during root canal treatment on clinical outcomes remains uncertain. J Evid Based Dent Pract 2011;11:87-88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebdp.2011.03.005
  9. Terauchi Y, O'Leary L, Suda H. Removal of separated files from root canals with a new file-removal system: case reports. J Endod 2006;32:789-797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2005.12.009
  10. Schneider SW. A comparison of canal preparations in straight and curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1971;32:271-275. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-4220(71)90230-1
  11. Fu M, Zhang Z, Hou B. Removal of broken files from root canals by using ultrasonic techniques combined with dental microscope: a retrospective analysis of treatment outcome. J Endod 2011;37:619-622. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2011.02.016
  12. Hulsmann M. Methods for removing metal obstructions from the root canal. Endod Dent Traumatol 1993;9:223-237. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-9657.1993.tb00278.x
  13. Cattoni M. Common failures in endodontics and their corrections. Dent Clin North Am 1963;7:383-399.
  14. Feldman G, Solomon C, Notaro P, Moskowitz E. Retrieving broken endodontic instruments. J Am Dent Assoc 1974;88:588-591. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.1974.0113
  15. Roig-Greene JL. The retrieval of foreign objects from root canals: a simple aid. J Endod 1983;9:394-397. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-2399(83)80193-9
  16. Eleazer PD, O'Connor RP. Innovative uses for hypodermic needles in endodontics. J Endod 1999;25:190-191. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-2399(99)80140-X
  17. Johnson WB, Beatty RG. Clinical technique for the removal of root canal obstructions. J Am Dent Assoc 1988;117:473-476. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-8177(88)73020-2
  18. Friedman S, Stabholz A, Tamse A. Endodontic retreatment--case selection and technique. 3. Retreatment techniques. J Endod 1990;16:543-549. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-2399(07)80219-6
  19. Okiji T. Modified usage of the Masserann kit for removing intracanal broken instruments. J Endod 2003;29:466-467. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004770-200307000-00010
  20. Ruddle CJ. Nonsurgical endodontic retreatment. J Calif Dent Assoc 2004;32:474-484.
  21. Hulsmann M. Removal of fractured root canal instruments using the Canal Finder System. Dtsch Zahnarztl Z 1990;45:229-232.
  22. Plotino G, Pameijer CH, Grande NM, Somma F. Ultrasonics in endodontics: a review of the literature. J Endod 2007;33:81-95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2006.10.008
  23. Yu DG, Kimura Y, Tomita Y, Nakamura Y, Watanabe H, Matsumoto K. Study on removal effects of filling materials and broken files from root canals using pulsed Nd:YAG laser. J Clin Laser Med Surg 2000;18:23-28. https://doi.org/10.1089/clm.2000.18.23
  24. Ebihara A, Takashina M, Anjo T, Takeda A, Suda H. Removal of root canal obstructions using pulsed Nd:YAG laser. ICS Lasers in Dentistry 2003;1248:257-259.
  25. Ormiga F, da Cunha Ponciano Gomes JA, de Araujo MC. Dissolution of nickel-titanium endodontic files via an electrochemical process: a new concept for future retrieval of fractured files in root canals. J Endod 2010;36:717-720. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2009.11.024
  26. Ruddle C. Microendodontics. Eliminating intracanal obstructions. Oral Health 1997;87:19-21.
  27. Ward JR, Parashos P, Messer HH. Evaluation of an ultrasonic technique to remove fractured rotary nickel-titanium endodontic instruments from root canals: an experimental study. J Endod 2003;29:756-763. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004770-200311000-00017
  28. Ward JR, Parashos P, Messer HH. Evaluation of an ultrasonic technique to remove fractured rotary nickel-titanium endodontic instruments from root canals: clinical cases. J Endod 2003;29:764-767. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004770-200311000-00018
  29. Sornkul E, Stannard JG. Strength of roots before and after endodontic treatment and restoration. J Endod 1992;18:440-443. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-2399(06)80845-9
  30. Gerek M, Baser ED, Kayahan MB, Sunay H, Kaptan RF, Bayirli G. Comparison of the force required to fracture roots vertically after ultrasonic and Masserann removal of broken instruments. Int Endod J 2012;45:429-434. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2011.01993.x
  31. Terauchi Y, O'Leary L, Kikuchi I, Asanagi M, Yoshioka T, Kobayashi C, Suda H. Evaluation of the efficiency of a new file removal system in comparison with two conventional systems. J Endod 2007;33:585-588. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2006.12.018