Dental and Medical Problems

Dent Med Probl
Index Copernicus (ICV 2020) – 128.41
MEiN – 70 pts
CiteScore (2021) – 2.0
JCI – 0.5
Average rejection rate (2021) – 81.35%
ISSN 1644-387X (print)
ISSN 2300-9020 (online)
Periodicity – quarterly

Download original text (EN)

Dental and Medical Problems

2020, vol. 57, nr 3, July-September, p. 255–259

doi: 10.17219/dmp/119771

Publication type: original article

Language: English

Download citation:

  • BIBTEX (JabRef, Mendeley)
  • RIS (Papers, Reference Manager, RefWorks, Zotero)

Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 3.0 Open Access

Comparison of OneShape, 2Shape and One Curve endodontic instruments for debris and irrigant extrusion

Porównanie efektywności usuwania resztek i płynów płuczących z kanałów korzeniowych za pomocą pilników OneShape, 2Shape i One Curve

Esma Saricam1,A,B,C,D,F, Guven Kayaoglu2,A,E,F

1 Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Ankara Yıldırım Beyazıt University, Turkey

2 Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey

Abstract

Background. Better understanding is needed about the debris-and-irrigant-extrusion potential of the instruments used for root canal preparation procedures, manufactured of different heat-treated alloys.
Objectives. The aim of the study was to evaluate the single-file nickel-titanium (NiTi) rotary system OneShape® and compare it with 2 different heat-treated instrumentation systems produced by the same manufacturer – a single-file C-wire system (One Curve®) and a multi-file T-wire system (2Shape®) – in terms of debris and irrigant extrusion.
Material and Methods. The mesiobuccal root canals of 51 extracted mandibular molar teeth were selected for the study. The roots were applied to the test apparatus prepared with the Myers and Montgomery method. The roots were divided into 3 groups according to the instrumentation system: OneShape; One Curve; and 2Shape. The root canals were prepared according to the manufacturer’s instructions. The analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the post hoc Tukey tests were used to evaluate the significance of the amount of the extruded debris and irrigant (p < 0.05).
Results. The One Curve group produced less debris extrusion than the 2Shape group (p < 0.05). There were no significant differences between the 2Shape and OneShape (p = 0.136), or the One Curve and OneShape groups (p = 0.159). The weight of the extruded irrigant was significantly lower for the One Curve group as compared to other systems (p < 0.05). The mean weight of the extruded irrigant did not differ significantly for the 2Shape and OneShape groups (p = 0.976).
Conclusion. The C-wire One Curve system was associated with less apical irrigant extrusion in comparison with the OneShape and 2Shape systems. The amount of debris extrusion produced by the One Curve system was similar to that produced by the OneShape system and lower than in the case of the 2Shape system.

Key words

endodontics, Nitinol, root canal preparation

Słowa kluczowe

endodoncja, Nitinol, przygotowanie kanału korzeniowego

References (32)

  1. Farmakis ETR, Sotiropoulos GG, Abramovitz I, Solomonov M. Apical debris extrusion associated with oval shaped canals: A comparative study of WaveOne vs Self-Adjusting File. Clin Oral Investig. 2016;20(8):2131–2138.
  2. Seltzer S, Naidorf IJ. Flare-ups in endodontics: I. Etiological factors. J Endod. 1985;11(11):472–478.
  3. Siqueira JF, Jr. Microbial causes of endodontic flare-ups. Int Endod J. 2003;36(7):453–463.
  4. Kuştarci A, Akpinar KE, Er K. Apical extrusion of intracanal debris and irrigant following use of various instrumentation techniques. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2008;105(2):257–262.
  5. Mendonça de Moura JD, da Silveira Bueno CE, Fontana CE, Pelegrine RA. Extrusion of debris from curved root canals instrumented up to different working lengths using different reciprocating systems. J Endod. 2019;45(7):930–934.
  6. Kherlakian D, Cunha RS, Ehrhardt IC, Zuolo ML, Kishen A, da Silveira Bueno CE. Comparison of the incidence of postoperative pain after using 2 reciprocating systems and a continuous rotary system: A prospective randomized clinical trial. J Endod. 2016;42(2):171–176.
  7. Bürklein S, Schäfer E. Apically extruded debris with reciprocating single-file and full-sequence rotary instrumentation systems. J Endod. 2012;38(6):850–852.
  8. Mittal R, Singla MG, Garg A, Dhawan A. A comparison of apical bacterial extrusion in manual, ProTaper rotary, and One Shape rotary instrumentation techniques. J Endod. 2015;41(12):2040–2044.
  9. Topçuoğlu HS, Topçuoğlu G, Kafdağ O, Balkaya H. Effect of two different temperatures on resistance to cyclic fatigue of One Curve, EdgeFile, HyFlex CM and ProTaper Next files. Aust Endod J. 2020;46(1):68–72 (Epub 2019).
  10. Elnaghy AM, Elsaka SE. Cyclic fatigue resistance of One Curve, 2Shape, ProFile Vortex, Vortex Blue, and RaCe nickel-titanium rotary instruments in single and double curvature canals. J Endod. 2018;44(11):1725–1730.
  11. Uslu G, Özyürek T, Gündoğar M, Yılmaz K. Cyclic fatigue resistance of 2Shape, Twisted File and EndoSequence Xpress nickel-titanium rotary files at intracanal temperature. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects. 2018;12(4):283–287.
  12. Singh S, Mirdha N, Shilpa PH, Tiwari RVC, Abdul MSM, Sainudeen S. Shaping ability of 2Shape and WaveOne Gold files using cone-beam computed tomography. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent. 2019;9(3):245–249.
  13. Sen OG, Bilgin B, Koçak S, Sağlam BC, Koçak MM. Evaluation of apically extruded debris using continuous rotation, reciprocation, or adaptive motion. Braz Dent J. 2018;29(3):245–248.
  14. Koçak MM, Çiçek E, Koçak S, Sağlam BC, Yılmaz N. Apical extrusion of debris using ProTaper Universal and ProTaper Next rotary systems. Int Endod J. 2015;48(3):283–286.
  15. Pawar AM, Pawar M, Kfir A, Thakur B, Mutha P, Banga KS. Effect of glide path preparation on apical extrusion of debris in root canals instrumented with three single-file systems: An ex vivo comparative study. J Conserv Dent. 2017;20(2):110–114.
  16. Topçuoğlu HS, Düzgün S, Akpek F, Topçuoğlu G, Aktı A. Influence of a glide path on apical extrusion of debris during canal prepa­ration using single-file systems in curved canals. Int Endod J. 2016;49(6):599–603.
  17. Ehsani M, Farhang R, Harandi A, Tavanafar S, Raoof M, Galledar S. Comparison of apical extrusion of debris by using single-file, full-sequence rotary and reciprocating systems. J Dent (Tehran). 2016;13(6):394–399.
  18. Bürklein S, Benten S, Schäfer E. Quantitative evaluation of apically extruded debris with different single-file systems: Reciproc, F360 and OneShape versus Mtwo. Int Endod J. 2014;47(5):405–409.
  19. Ghoneim WM, Shaheen NA. Apically extruded debris associated with different instrumentation systems and irrigation needles. Tanta Dent J. 2018;15(2):105–110.
  20. Schneider SW. A comparison of canal preparations in straight and curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1971;32(2):271–275.
  21. Myers GL, Montgomery S. A comparison of weights of debris extruded apically by conventional filing and Canal Master techniques. J Endod. 1991;17(6):275–279.
  22. Ferraz CC, Gomes NV, Gomes BP, Zaia AA, Teixeira FB, Souza-Filho FJ. Apical extrusion of debris and irrigants using two hand and three engine-driven instrumentation techniques. Int Endod J. 2001;34(5):354–358.
  23. Gündoğar M, Özyürek T. Cyclic fatigue resistance of OneShape, HyFlex EDM, WaveOne Gold, and Reciproc Blue nickel-titanium instruments. J Endod. 2017;43(7):1192–1196.
  24. Staffoli S, Grande NM, Plotino G, et al. Influence of environmental temperature, heat-treatment and design on the cyclic fatigue resistance of three generations of a single-file nickel-titanium rotary instrument. Odontology. 2019;107(3):301–307.
  25. Kaloustian MK, Nehme W, El Hachem C, et al. Evaluation of two shaping systems and two ultrasonic irrigation devices in removing root canal filling material from mesial roots of mandibular molars: A micro CT study. Dent J (Basel). 2019;7(1):2.
  26. Kirchhoff AL, Fariniuk LF, Mello I. Apical extrusion of debris in flat-oval root canals after using different instrumentation systems. J Endod. 2015;41(2):237–241.
  27. Tanalp J, Güngör T. Apical extrusion of debris: A literature review of an inherent occurrence during root canal treatment. Int Endod J. 2014;47(3):211–221.
  28. Altundasar E, Nagas E, Uyanik O, Serper A. Debris and irrigant extrusion potential of 2 rotary systems and irrigation needles. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2011;112(4):e31–e35.
  29. Lu Y, Wang R, Zhang L, et al. Apically extruded debris and irrigant with two Ni-Ti systems and hand files when removing root fillings: A laboratory study. Int Endod J. 2013;46(12):1125–1130.
  30. Walia HM, Brantley WA, Gerstein H. An initial investigation of the bending and torsional properties of Nitinol root canal files. J Endod. 1988;14(7):346–351.
  31. Goo HJ, Kwak SW, Ha JH, Pedullà E, Kim HC. Mechanical properties of various heat-treated nickel-titanium rotary instruments. J Endod. 2017;43(11):1872–1877.
  32. Zhao D, Shen Y, Peng B, Haapasalo M. Effect of autoclave sterilization on the cyclic fatigue resistance of thermally treated nickel-titanium instruments. Int Endod J. 2016;49(10):990–995.