CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Eur J Dent 2019; 13(04): 613-618
DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-3399407
Original Article
Dental Investigation Society

Apical Transportation and Centering Ability After Root Canal Filling Removal Using Reciprocating and Continuous Rotary Systems: A CBCT Study

Etienny da Silva Arruda
1  School of Dentistry, Federal University of Amazonas, Manaus, Amazonas, Brazil
,
Emílio Carlos Sponchiado-Júnior
1  School of Dentistry, Federal University of Amazonas, Manaus, Amazonas, Brazil
,
Mariana Travi Pandolfo
2  Department of Dentistry, Endodontics Division, Health Sciences Center, Federal University of Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, Santa Catarina, Brazil
,
Márcio Acris de Carvalho Fredson
3  Superior School of Health Sciences, State University of Amazonas, Manaus, Amazonas, Brazil
,
Lucas da Fonseca Roberi Garcia
2  Department of Dentistry, Endodontics Division, Health Sciences Center, Federal University of Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, Santa Catarina, Brazil
,
André Augusto Franco Marques
3  Superior School of Health Sciences, State University of Amazonas, Manaus, Amazonas, Brazil
› Author Affiliations
Funding The authors would like to thank the “Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Amazonas–FAPEAM” (Process Nº 062.00649/2015) for the financial support.
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
31 December 2019 (online)

  

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the apical transportation and centering ability promoted by reciprocating and continuous rotary systems after root canal filling removal.

Materials and Methods After obturation, 40 mesial root canals of mandibular molars were distributed into four groups (n = 20) for filling material removal: PTU group–F2 instrument (25.08) of ProTaper Universal system; R25 group–R25 instrument (25.08) of Reciproc system; X2 group–X2 instrument (25.06) of ProTaper Next system and X3 group–X2 instrument (25.06) of ProTaper Next system, followed by X3 instrument (30.07). Cone-beam computed tomographic analysis was performed before and after filling material removal for acquisition of apical images. Apical transportation (AT) and its direction, and centering ability (CA), were assessed using the equations AT = (X1–X2)–(Y1–Y2) and CA = (X1–X2/Y1–Y2 or Y1–Y2/X1–X2), respectively. Data were submitted to the nonparametric Kruskal–Wallis and Dunn multiple comparison tests (p < 0.05) for statistical analysis.

Results There was no statistically significant difference among groups for AT (p > 0.05), with a tendency toward transportation in the distal direction. Also, there was no statistically significant difference among groups regarding CA (p > 0.05).

Conclusions The different systems, including ProTaper Next, caused AT within the acceptable clinical limit after filling removal. In addition, none of the tested systems presented adequate CA.