Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics

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

DOI QR Code

Comparison of shaping ability between single length technique and crown-down technique using Mtwo rotary file

Mtwo 전동 파일을 사용한 single length technique과 crown-down technique의 근관성형 효율 비교

  • Lim, Yoo-Kyoung (Department of Conservative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Pusan National University) ;
  • Park, Jeong-Kil (Department of Conservative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Pusan National University) ;
  • Hur, Bock (Department of Conservative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Pusan National University) ;
  • Kim, Hyeon-Cheol (Department of Conservative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Pusan National University)
  • 임유경 (부산대학교 치의학전문대학원 치과보존학교실) ;
  • 박정길 (부산대학교 치의학전문대학원 치과보존학교실) ;
  • 허복 (부산대학교 치의학전문대학원 치과보존학교실) ;
  • 김현철 (부산대학교 치의학전문대학원 치과보존학교실)
  • Published : 2007.03.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The aims of this study were to compare the shaping effect and safety between single length technique recommended by manufacturer and crown-down technique using Mtwo rotary file and to present a modified method in use of Mtwo file. Sixty simulated root canal resin blocks were used. The canals were divided into three groups according to instrument and the manner of using methods. Each group had 20 specimens. Group MT was instrumented with single length technique of Mtwo, group MC was instrumented with crown-down technique of Mtwo and group PT was instrumented with crown-down technique of ProTaper. All of the rotary files used in this study were operated by an electric motor. The scanned canal images of before and after preparation were superimposed. These superimposed images were evaluated at apical 1 to 8 mm levels Angle changes were calculated. The preparation time, weight loss, instrument failure and binding, canal aberrations, and centering ratio were measured. Statistical analysis of the three experimental groups was performed with ANOVA and Duncan's multiple range tests for post-hoc comparison and Fisher's exact test was done for the frequency comparison. In total preparation time, group MT and group MC were less than group PT. In the aberrations, group MT had more elbows than those of group MC and group PT. The binding of group MC was least and group MT was less than group PT (P < 0.05). Under the condition of this study, crown-down technique using Mtwo rotary file is better and safer method than single length technique recommended by the manufacturer.

이 연구의 목적은 Mtwo 전동 파일의 사용에 있어서 제조사가 제안한 single length technique과 crown-down technique의 근관성형효율과 안전성을 비교하고 Mtwo 전동 파일의 변형된 사용방법을 제안하고자 하는 것이다. 기구의 종류와 사용방법에 따라 60개의 레진 블록 근관 모형 (Endo Training Bloc; Benstply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland)을 세 군으로 나누어 20개씩 표본을 성형하였다. MT군은 Mtwo 파일 (VDW, Munich, Germany)을 제조사의 추천방법인 single length technique으로, MC군은 Mtwo 파일을 crown-down technique으로 형성하였고, 대조군인 PT군은 ProTaper (Denstply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland)를 사용하였다. 모든 기구는 250 r.p.m., torque 2.2 N로 고정한 전동 모터 (X-smart; Denstply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland)로 사용하였다. 근관 성형 후, 스캐너로 근관 형성 전후의 이미지를 채득하여 중첩 비교함으로써 근단부로부터 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 mm 높이에서의 중심변위율을 산출하였다. 순수 기구조작 시간 및 기구조작 동안의 binding빈도를 기록하였다. 근관 성형 후, 레진 블록의 무게 감소를 측정하였고 근관 성형에 사용된 파일의 파절이나 변형 및 근관 성형 후 형태의 이상을 조사하였다. 세 실험군의 측정 및 산출된 자료를 일원배치 분산분석 및 Duncan's Multiple Range Test로 사후 검정을 시행하여 비교하였으며, Fisher's exact test으로 근관의 이형성, 기구의 변형 그리고 기구 binding 등 발생 빈도를 유의 확률 95%에서 통계 검정하였다. 그 결과는 다음과 같다. 1. 근관의 만곡도 감소, 중심변위율, 레진 블록의 무게 감소, 기구 변형 등은 세 군간에 유의한 차이가 없었다 (p > 0.05). 2. 기구 조작 시간은 보면 MT군과 MC군이 PT군보다 짧았다 (p < 0.05). 3. Elbow는 MT군이 MC군에서 PT군보다 더 많이 형성되었다 (p < 0.05). Ledge는 세 군 모두에서 나타나지 않았다. 4. 파일 binding 횟수는 MC군이 가장 적고 PT군이 가장 많았다 (p < 0.05). 이상의 결과를 볼 때, Mtwo 전동 파일을 crown-down technique으로 사용하는 것이 single length technique과 유사한 성형 효율을 보이면서도 더 안전할 것으로 추정된다.

Keywords

References

  1. Glosson CR. Haller RH, Dove SB, del Rio CE. A comparison of root canal preparations using Ni-Ti hand. Ni-Ti engine-driven. and K-Flex endodontic instruments, J Endod 21:146-151. 1995 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-2399(06)80441-3
  2. Walia HM, Brantley WA, Gerstein H, An initial investigation of the bending and torsional properties of Nitinol root canal files. J Endod 14:346-351. 1988 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-2399(88)80196-1
  3. Schafer E, Schulz-Bongert U. Tulus G. Comparison of hand stainless steel and nickel titanium rotary instrumentation: a clinical study, J Endod 30:432-435, 2004 https://doi.org/10.1097/00004770-200406000-00014
  4. Chen JL, Messer HH. A comparison of stainless steel hand and rotary nickel-titanium instrumentation using a silicone impression technique, Aust Dent J 47:12-20, 2002 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1834-7819.2002.tb00297.x
  5. Garip Y. Gunday M. The use of computed tomography when comparing nickel-titanium and stainless steel files during preparation of simulated curved canals. Int Endod J 34:452-457, 2001 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2591.2001.00416.x
  6. Pettiette MT, Delano EO, Trope M. Evaluation of success rate of endodontic treatment performed by students with stainless-steel K-files and nickel-titanium hand files. J Endod 27:124-127, 2001 https://doi.org/10.1097/00004770-200102000-00017
  7. Schafer E. Shaping ability of Hero 642 rotary nickeltitanium instruments and stainless steel hand K-Flexofiles in simulated curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 92:215-220, 2001 https://doi.org/10.1067/moe.2001.114622
  8. Peters OA. Current Challenges and Concepts in the Preparation of Root Canal Systems: A Review. J Endod 30:559-567, 2004 https://doi.org/10.1097/01.DON.0000129039.59003.9D
  9. Kum KY, Spangberg L, Cha BY, Jung IY, Lee SJ, Lee CY. Shaping ability of three ProFile rotary instrumentation techniques in simulated resin root canals. J Endod 26:719-723, 2000 https://doi.org/10.1097/00004770-200012000-00013
  10. Schafer E, Erler M, Dammaschke T. Comparative study on the shaping ability and cleaning efficiency of rotary Mtwo instruments. Part 1. Shaping ability in simulated curved canals. Int Endod J 39: 196-202, 2006 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2006.01074.x
  11. Veltri M, Mollo A, Mantovani L, Pini P, Balleri P, Grandini S. A comparative study of Endoflare-Hero Shaper and Mtwo NiTi instruments in the preparation of curved root canals. Int Endod J 38:601-616, 2005
  12. Schneider SW. A comparison of canal preparations in straight and curved root canals. Oral Surg 32:271-275, 1971 https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-4220(71)90230-1
  13. Gunday M, Sazak H. Garip Y. A comparative study of three different root canal curvature measurement techniques and measuring the canal access angle in curved canals. J Endod 31: 796-798, 2005 https://doi.org/10.1097/01.don.0000158232.77240.01
  14. Kim HC, Park JK, Hur B. Relative efficacy of three NiTi file systems used by undergraduates. J Kor Acad Cons Dent 30:38-48, 2005 https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2005.30.1.038
  15. Bergmans L, Van Cleynenbreugel J, Beullens M, Wevers M, Van Meerbeek B, Lambrechts P. Progressive versus constant tapered shaft design using Ni-Ti rotary instruments. Int Endod J 36:288-295, 2003 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2591.2003.00650.x
  16. Calhoun G, Montgomery S. The effects of four instrumentation techniques on root canal shape. J Endod 14:273-277, 1988 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-2399(88)80025-6
  17. Kosa DA. Marshall G, Baumgartner JC. An analysis of canal centering using mechanical instrumentation techniques. J Endod 25:441-445, 1999 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-2399(99)80275-1
  18. Foschi F, Nucci C, Montebugnoli L, Marchionni S. Breschi L, Malagnino VA. Prati C. SEM evaluation of canal wall dentine following use of Mtwo and ProTaper Ni-Ti rotary instruments. Int Endod J 37:832-839, 2004 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2004.00887.x
  19. Schafer E, Erler M, Dammaschke T. Comparative study on the shaping ability and cleaning efficiency of rotary Mtwo instruments. Part 2. Cleaning effectiveness and shaping ability in severely curved root canals of extracted teeth. Int Endod J 39: 203-212, 2006 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2006.01075.x
  20. Berutti E, Chiandussi G. Gaviqlio I. Ibba A. Comparative analysis of torsional and bending stresses in two mathematical models of nickel-titanium rotary instruments: ProTaper versus ProFile. J Endod 29:15-19, 2003 https://doi.org/10.1097/00004770-200301000-00005
  21. Calberson FL, Deroose CA, Hommez GM, De Moor RJ. Shaping ability of Pro Taper nickel-titanium files in simulated resin root canals. Int Endod J 37:613-623, 2004 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2004.00860.x
  22. Iqbal MK. Firic S, Tulcan J, Karabucak B. Kim S. Comparison of apical transportation between ProFile and ProTaper NiTi rotary instruments. Int Endod J 37: 359-364, 2004 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2004.00792.x
  23. Schafer E, Vlassis M. Comparative investigation of two rotary nickel-titanium instruments: ProTaper versus RaCe. Part 1. Shaping ability in simulated curved canals. Int Endod J 37:229-238, 2004 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0143-2885.2004.00786.x
  24. Yun HH, Kim SK. A comparison of the shaping abilities of 4 nickel-titanium rotary instruments in simulated root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 95:228-233, 2003 https://doi.org/10.1067/moe.2003.92
  25. Peters OA, Peters CI, Schoneberger K. Barbakov F. ProTaper rotary root canal preparation: effect of canal anatomy on final shape analyzed by micro CT. Int Endod J 36:86-92, 2003 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2591.2003.00626.x
  26. Hong ES, Park JK. Hur B, Kim HC. Comparison of shaping ability between various hybrid instrumentation methods with ProTaper. J Kor Acad Cons Dent 31: 1119, 2006 https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2006.31.1.011
  27. Peters OA, Peters CI, Schonenberger K. Barbakow F. ProTaper rotary root canal preparation: assessment of torque and force in relation to canal anatomy. Int Endod J 36:93-99. 2003 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2591.2003.00628.x
  28. Diemer F, Calas P. Effect of pitch length on the behaviour of rotary triple helix root canal instruments. J Endod 30: 716-718, 2004 https://doi.org/10.1097/01.DON.0000125877.26495.69
  29. Bergmans L, Van Cleynenbreugel J, Wevers M, Lambrechts P. Mechanical root canal preparation with NiTi rotary instruments: Rationale, performance and safety. Status Report for the Am J Dent 14:324-333, 2001
  30. Leeb JI. Canal orifice enlargement as related to biomechanical preparation. J Endod 9:463-470, 1983 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-2399(83)80160-5
  31. Schrader C, Peters OA. Analysis of torque and force with differently tapered rotary endodontic instruments in vitro. J Endod 31: 120-123, 2005 https://doi.org/10.1097/01.don.0000137634.20499.1d
  32. Sattapan B, Nervo GJ, Palamara JE, Messer HH. Defects in rotary nickel-titanium files after clinical use. J Endod 26:161-165, 2000 https://doi.org/10.1097/00004770-200003000-00008
  33. Cohen S, Burns RC. Pathways of the pulp. 7th edition Translation Shinhung International, Inc. p252-254, 1999