» Articles » PMID: 7561660

Canal Blockage and Debris Extrusion with Eight Preparation Techniques

Overview
Journal J Endod
Publisher Elsevier
Specialty Dentistry
Date 1995 Mar 1
PMID 7561660
Citations 53
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The objective of this study was to assess and compare canal blockages and apical extrusion of dentin debris during canal shaping with eight preparation techniques. A total of 208 canals in extracted human teeth were prepared by one operator using one type of file. The techniques included were standardized, stepback with reaming, stepback with circumferential filing, stepback with anticurvature filing, double-flare, stepdown, crown-down pressureless, and balanced force. Records were kept of the number of canals that became permanently blocked with debris at some stage during preparation. Dentin debris extruded apically was collected in preweighed containers and the dry weight of debris determined to 10(-5) g precision. Blockages varied significantly among techniques (p < 0.001) and occurred most frequently in canals prepared with the stepback techniques with anticurvature (n = 19) and circumferential filing (n = 16) and least in the balanced force technique (n = 0). Apical extrusion occurred in 169 of the 208 roots, but there were no significant differences in the incidence of extrusion among techniques. The weight of extruded dentin did vary significantly among techniques (p < 0.05), with most extrusion occurring with the stepback techniques with circumferential (0.71 mg) and anticurvature (0.69 mg) filing and the least extrusion with the balanced force (0.38 mg) and crown-down pressureless (0.46 mg) techniques. Under the conditions of this study, it is concluded that techniques involving a filing (linear) motion caused significantly more blockages and extruded significantly more apical dentin debris.

Citing Articles

Comparative Analysis of Three Nickel-Titanium Rotary Files in Severely Curved L-Shaped Root Canals: Preparation Time, Aberrations, and Fracture Rates.

Almnea R, Al Ageel Albeaji S, Alelyani A, AlHarith D, Alshahrani A, Al Malwi A Clin Cosmet Investig Dent. 2024; 16:1-9.

PMID: 38384359 PMC: 10878313. DOI: 10.2147/CCIDE.S452742.


In vitro apical extrusion of debris and instrumentation time following root canal instrumentation with Reciproc and Reciproc Blue instruments and a novel stainless steel rotary system (Gentlefile) versus manual instrumentation.

Nouroloyouni A, Shahi S, Milani A, Noorolouny S, Farhang R, Yousefi Azar A J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects. 2023; 17(3):136-141.

PMID: 38023797 PMC: 10676536. DOI: 10.34172/joddd.2023.39271.


Apical Extrusion: Is It an Inherent Occurrence During Every Endodontic Treatment?.

Laslami K, Khaldoune S, Sy A, Drouri S, Benkiran I Cureus. 2023; 15(9):e45211.

PMID: 37720124 PMC: 10504573. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.45211.


Postoperative pain after endodontic treatment of mandibular molars with two different instrumentation techniques: A randomized clinical trial.

Nouroloyouni A, Lotfi M, Shahi S, Rahimi S, Noorolouny S, Milani A Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2023; 20:83.

PMID: 37674570 PMC: 10478836.


Endodontic Flare-Ups: An Update.

Sharma A, Sharma R, Sharma M, Jain S, Rai A, Gupta S Cureus. 2023; 15(7):e41438.

PMID: 37546112 PMC: 10403811. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.41438.