Home Print this page Email this page Users Online: 134
Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
Year : 2023  |  Volume : 13  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 73-79

Comparison of root canal transportation and centering after instrumentation through conservative and traditional access cavities using different file systems: An in vitro study

Department of Restorative and Aesthetic Dentistry, College of Dentistry, University of Baghdad, Baghdad, Iraq

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Samer Abbas Kadhim
Department of Restorative and Aesthetic Dentistry, College of Dentistry, University of Baghdad, Baghdad
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/sej.sej_112_22

Rights and Permissions

Introduction: While conservative access preparations could increase fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth, it may influence the shape of the prepared root canal. The aim of this study was to compare the prepared canal transportation and centering ability after continuous rotation or reciprocation instrumentation in teeth accessed through traditional or conservative endodontic cavities by using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Materials and Methods: Forty extracted intact, matured, and 2-rooted human maxillary first premolars were selected for this study. Teeth were equally divided into two groups according to the access cavity design (traditional or conservative). Each group (n = 20) was further subdivided according to instrumentation technique (n = 10) into rotary 2 shape and reciprocation R-motion file subgroups. The teeth were scanned pre and post instrumentation using Planmeca ProMax to obtain two CBCT images for each sample. Images were analyzed and root canal transportation and centering ability were calculated for both buccal and palatal roots at three levels from their apices (3, 5 to 7 mm). Results: Although conservative access cavities showed more canal transportation and less centering ability than the traditional one, there was no statistically significant difference (P > 0.05) between them at all levels. Furthermore, no statistically significant difference has been identified in the same parameter between the two instrumentation techniques (continuous rotation and reciprocation) (P > 0.05). However, longer instrumentation time was measured in the conservative group compared to traditional. Conclusion: The size of endodontic access cavity has no effect on root canal transportation and centering ability when instrumentation was performed using 2 shape and R-motion file systems.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded36    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal