Effectiveness of Rotary Endodontic Instruments on Smear Layer Removal in Root Canals of Primary Teeth: A Scanning Electron Microscopy Study

Aim : The present SEM study was undertaken to evaluate the effect of root canal instrumentation using both manual and rotary files in the root canals of primary anterior teeth. Study design: Thirty freshly extracted primary maxillary incisors were divided into 3 groups of 10 teeth each. In Group I, root canals were instrumented with rotary NiTi files; in Group II, the root canals were instrumented using manual NiTi K files and; in Group III, manual instrumentation was done with stainless steel K files. Longitudinal sections were prepared and processed for observation under SEM at the coronal, middle and apical thirds. Scoring of smear layer was done according to Hulsmann and the data obtained was subjected to statistical analysis. Results: Rotary files cleaned the coronal and middle thirds of root canals more effectively. Statistically there was no significant difference between the groups. Lowest score of 2.6 in the apical third of root canals was seen with hand NiTi files. Conclusion: Rotary instrumentation was as effective as manual instrumentation in removal of smear layer in the root canals of primary anterior teeth.

rotary instruments, SEM, files, smear layer, apical third

1. Walia HM, Brantley WA, Gerstein H. An initial investigation of the bending and torsional properties of Nitinol root canal files. J Endod 14(7):346-51, 1988.

2. Thompson SA. An overview of nickel-titanium alloys used in dentistry. Int Endod J 33:297-310,2000.

3. Vaudt J, Bitter K, Kielbassa AM, Evaluation of rotary root canal instru-ments in vitro: a review. Endo 1(3):189-203, 2007.

4. Abbott PV, Heijkoop PS, Cardaci SC, Hume WR, Heithersay GS. An SEM study of the effects of different irrigation sequences and ultrasonics. Endo 24(6):308-16, 1991.

5. Shovelton DS. The presence and distribution of microorganisms within non-vital teeth.Br Dent J117:101-7, 1964.

6. Cohen S, Hargreaves KM. Pathways of the pulp. 9th ed. St.Louis: Else-vier Mosby;2006. p.260, 301-311, 365-367, 842.

7. Barr ES, Kleier DJ, Barr NV. Use of nickel-titanium rotary files for root canal preparation in primary teeth. Pediatr Dent 21(7):453-4, 1999.

8. Barr ES, Kleier DJ, Barr NV. Use of nickel-titanium rotary files for root canal preparation in primary teeth. Pediatr Dent 22(1):77-8,2000.

9. Silva LA, Leonardo MR, Nelson-Filho P, Tanomaru JM. Comparison of rotary and manual instrumentation techniques on cleaning capacity and instrumentation time in deciduous molars. J Dent Child 71(1):45-7, 2004.

10. Bahrololoomi Z, Tabrizizadeh M, Salmani L. In vitro comparison of instrumentation time and cleaning capacity between rotary and manual preparation techniques in primary anterior teeth. J Dent, Tehran Univer-sity of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran 4(2):59-2, 2007.

11. Ochoa-Romero T, Mendez-Gonzalez V, Flores-Reyes H, Pozos-Guillen AJ. Comparison between rotary and manual techniques on duration of instrumentation and obturation times in primary teeth. J Clin Pediatr Dent 35(4):359-63, 2011.

12. Mortazavi M, Abbasi A, Khodadadi E.Comparison of canal cleansing time and pulpectomy success rate in deciduous molars by use of hand and rotary files. Dental Journal of Shiraz University of Medical Science 2:111-9, 2006.

13. Moghaddam KN, Mehran M, Zadeh HF, Root canal cleaning efficacy of rotary and hand files instrumentation in primary molars. IEJ 4(2):53-7, 2009.

14. Madan N, Rathnam A, Shigli AL, Indushekar KR.K-file vs ProFiles in cleaning capacity and instrumentation time in primary molar root canals: an in vitro study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 29(1):2-6, 2011.

15. Crespo S, Cortes O, Garcia C Perez L. Comparison between rotary and manual instrumentation in primary teeth. J Clin Pediatr Dent 32(4):295-8, 2008.

16. Nagaratna PJ, Shashikiran ND, Subbareddy VV. In vitro comparison of NiTi rotary instruments and stainless steel hand instruments in root canal preparations of primary and permanent molar. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 24(4):186-91,2006.

17. Kummer TR, Calvo MC, Cordeiro MM, de Sousa Vieira R, de Carvalho Rocha MJ. Ex vivo study of manual and rotary instrumentation tech-niques in human primary teeth. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 105(4):84-92, 2008.

18. Canoglu H, Tekcicek MU, Cehreli ZC. Comparison of conventional, rotary, and ultrasonic preparation, different final irrigation regimens, and 2 sealers in primary molar root canal therapy. Pediatr Dent 28(6):518-23, 2006.

19. Azar MR, Mokhtare M. Rotary Mtwo system versus manual K-file instru-ments: efficacy in preparing primary and permanent molar root canals. Indian J Dent Res 22(2):363, 2011.

20. Veltri M, Mollo A, Mantovani L, Pini P, Balleri P, Grandini S. A compar-ative study of Endoflare-Hero Shaper and Mtwo NiTi instruments in the preparation of curved root canals. Int Endod J 38(9):610-6, 2005.

21. Grossman. Grossman’s Endodontic Practice. 12th ed. New Delhi: Wolters Kluwer Health (India) Pvt Ltd.2011 pg 221-262.

22. 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 NiTi rotary instruments. Int Endod J 37(12):832-9,2004.

23. Zand V, Bidar M, Ghaziani P, Rahimi S, Shahi S. A. A comparative SEM investigation of the smear layer following preparation of root canals using nickel titanium rotary and hand instruments. J Oral Sci. 49(1):47-52, 2007

24. Hülsmann M, Rümmelin C, Schäfers F. Root canal cleanliness after preparation with different endodontic handpieces and hand instruments: a comparative SEM investigation. J Endod 23(5):301-6, 1997.

25. Kaptan F, Sert S, Kayahan B, Haznedaroglu F, Tanalp J et al. Comparative evaluation of the preparation efficacies of HERO Shaper and Nitiflex root canal instruments in curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 100:636-42, 2005.

26. Kum KY, Kazemi RB, Cha BY, Zhu Q. Smear layer production of K3 and Pro File Ni-Ti rotary instruments in curved root canals: a comparative SEM study. .Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 101:536-41, 2006.

27. Blum YU, Machtou P, Micallef JP. Location of contact areas on rotary Profile instruments in relationship to the forces developed during mechan-ical preparation on extracted teeth. Int Endod J 32(2):108-14, 1999

28. Ibelli GS, Barroso JM, Capelli A, Spanó JC, Pécora JD. Influence of cervical preflaring on apical file size determination in maxillary Lateral incisors. Braz Dent J 18(2) 102-106, 2007.

29. Brkanić T, Zivković S, Drobac M. Root canal preparation techniques using nickel-titanium rotary instruments. Med Pregl 58(3-4):203-7, 2005.

30. Pécora JD, Capelli A, Guerisoli DMZ, Spanó JCE, Estrela C.Influence of cervical preflaring on the apical file size determination. Int Endod J 38:

430- 435,2005

31. Kuo CI, Wang YL, Chang HH, Huang GF, Lin CP, Guo MK, Li UM. Application of Ni-Ti rotary files for pulpectomy in primary molars. J Dent Sci 1:10-15,2006.

32. Grandini S, Balleri P, Ferrari M. Evaluation of Glyde File Prep in combination with sodium hypochlorite as a root canal irrigant. J Endod 28(4):300-3, 2002.

33. Cohen S, Burns RC. Pathways of pulp, 6th ed. St Louis: Mo.: Elsevier Mosby 179–218, 1994.

34. Pashley DH, Michelich V, Kehl T. Dentin permeability: effects of smear layer removal. J Prosthet Dent 46(5):531-7, 1981.

35. Peters OA, Barbakow F. Effects of irrigation on debris and smear layer on canal walls prepared by two rotary techniques: A scanning electron microscopic study. J Endod 26(1):6-10, 2000.

36. Kennedy WA, Walker WA, Gough RW. Smear layer removal effects on apical leakage. J Endod 12(1):21-7, 1986.

37. Kokkas AB, Boutsioukis ACh, Vassiliadis LP, Stavrianos CK. The influ-ence of the smear layer on dentinal tubule penetration depth by three different root canal sealers: an in vitro study. J Endod 30 (2):100-2, 2004.

38. Gambarini G, Laszkiewicz J A scanning electron microscopic study of debris and smear layer remaining following use of GT rotary instruments Int Endod J 35(5):422-7,2002.

39. Prati C, Foschi F, Nucci C, Montebugnoli L, Marchionni S. Appearance of the root canal walls after preparation with NiTi rotary instruments: a comparative SEM investigation. Clin Oral Investig 8(2):102-10, 2004.

40. Mayer BE, Peters OA, Barbakow F. Effects of rotary instruments and ultrasonic irrigation on debris and smear layer scores: a scanning electron microscopic study. Int Endod J 35(7):582-9, 2002.

41. Hariharan VS, Nandlal B, Srilatha KT. Efficacy of various root canal irrigants on removal of smear layer in the primary root canals after hand instrumentation: a scanning electron microscopy study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 28(4):271-7, 2010.

42. Pitoni CM, Figueirdo MC, Araujo FB, Souza MA. Ethylenediaminetetra acetic acid and citric acid solution for smear layer removal in primary tooth root canals. J Dent Child 78(3):131-7,2011.