Login Register Cart 0
Generic placeholder image

Current Dentistry

Editor-in-Chief

ISSN (Print): 2542-579X
ISSN (Online): 2542-5803

Back
Journal Home About Journal Editorial Board Current Issue Volumes/Issues
Subscribe
Research Article

Success Rate of Obturation of Root Canals by Different Techniques in Primary Molars: A Comparative Clinical Study

Author(s): Satyawan G. Damle*, Ritika Bansal and Dhanashree D. Sakhare

Volume 2, Issue 1, 2020

Page: [36 - 44] Pages: 9

DOI: 10.2174/2542579X02999200503032916

Price: $65

Abstract

Objective: To compare the success rate of different obturation procedures in primary mandibular second molars clinically and also by digital radiovisiography.

Methods: A total of 40 children aged between 4-8 years with deeply carious mandibular second primary molars indicated for single session pulpectomy were selected. Canals were obturated with Metapex. The 3 study groups (Endodontic plugger, Handheld lentulospiral, Navi Tip syringe) were compared with the control group (reamer) both clinically and radiovisiographically. The data collected were statistically analyzed using Pearson’s Chi-square and Fisher’s exact test.

Results: The use of Navi tip syringe led to the least number of voids followed by Endodontic plugger and Reamer and the highest number of voids was reported with Lentulospiral. Navitip presented maximum number of optimally filled cases followed by Endodontic plugger and Lentulospiral and least number of optimally filled cases with reamer. However, there was no statistically significant difference (p>0.05) in any of the groups with clinical (pain and tenderness to percussion) and radiographic parameters (presence or absence of voids and length of obturation).

Conclusion: Within the limitations of the present study, though the clinical outcome was statistically insignificant, Navitip syringe exhibited encouraging results and is a promising option for obturation in primary teeth.

Keywords: Disposable syringe, lentulospiral, obturation techniques, primary teeth, pulpectomy, root canals.

Graphical Abstract

[1]
Hobson P. Pulp treatment of deciduous teeth. 1. Factors affecting diagnosis and treatment. Br Dent J 1970; 128: 232-8.
[2]
Berk H, Krakow AA. A comparison of the management of pulpal pathosis in deciduous and permanent teeth. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1972; 34: 944-55.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0030-4220(72)90232-0]
[3]
Allen KR. Endodontic treatment of primary teeth. Aust Dent J 1979; 24(5): 347-51.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1834-7819.1979.tb05807.x ] [PMID: 294240]
[4]
Coll JA, Sadrian R. Predicting pulpectomy success and its relationship to exfoliation and succedaneous dentition. Pediatr Dent 1996; 18(1): 57-63.
[PMID: 8668572]
[5]
Milledge JT. Endodontic therapy for primary teeth Ingle’s Endodontics. 6th ed. Hamilton: BC Decker Inc. 2008; pp. 1400-30.
[6]
Johnson MS, Britto LR, Guelmann M. Impact of a biological barrier in pulpectomies of primary molars. Pediatr Dent 2006; 28(6): 506-10.
[PMID: 17249431]
[7]
Payne RG, Kenny DJ, Johnston DH, Judd PL. Two-year outcome study of zinc oxide-eugenol root canal treatment for vital primary teeth. J Can Dent Assoc 1993; 59(6): 528-530, 533-536.
[PMID: 8513418]
[8]
Sadrian R, Coll JA. A long-term followup on the retention rate of zinc oxide eugenol filler after primary tooth pulpectomy. Pediatr Dent 1993; 15(4): 249-53.
[PMID: 8247898]
[9]
Hany M. Pulpectomy procedure in primary molar teeth. Eur J Gen Dent 2014; 3(1): 3-10.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2278-9626.126201]
[10]
Ounsi HF, Debaybo D, Salameh Z, Chebaro A, Bassam H. Endodontic considerations in pediatric dentistry: A clinical perspective. Int Dent South Afr 2009; 11: 40-50.
[11]
Praveen P, Ananthraj A, Karthik V, Prathiba R, Sudhir R, Jaya A. A review of obturating materials for primary teeth. Streamdent 2011; 2: 42-4.
[12]
Stallaert KM. A retrospective study of root canal therapy in non vital primary molars. Toronto: University of Toronto; 2011. How to cite this article: Aly Ahmed HM. Pulpectomy procedures in primary molar teeth. Eur J Gen Dent 2014; 3: 3-10.
[13]
Chen J, Jorden M. Materials for primary tooth pulp treatment: The present and the future. Endod Topics 2012; 23: 41-9.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1601-1546.2012.00289.x]
[14]
Rodd HD, Waterhouse PJ, Fuks AB, Fayle SA, Moffat MA. British society of paediatric dentistry. Pulp therapy for primary molars. Int J Paediatr Dent 2006; 16(Suppl. 1): 15-23.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-263X.2006.00774.x ] [PMID: 16939452]
[15]
Pramila R, Muthu MS, Deepa G, Farzan JM, Rodrigues SJ. Pulpectomies in primary mandibular molars: a comparison of outcomes using three root filling materials. Int Endod J 2016; 49(5): 413-21.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/iej.12478 ] [PMID: 26059708]
[16]
Moskovitz M, Sammara E, Holan G. Success rate of root canal treatment in primary molars. J Dent 2005; 33(1): 41-7.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2004.07.009 ] [PMID: 15652167]
[17]
Ozalp N, Saroğlu I, Sönmez H. Evaluation of various root canal filling materials in primary molar pulpectomies: an in vivo study. Am J Dent 2005; 18(6): 347-50.
[PMID: 16433405]
[18]
Gupta S, Das G. Clinical and radiographic evaluation of zinc oxide eugenol and metapex in root canal treatment of primary teeth. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2011; 29(3): 222-8.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0970-4388.85829 ] [PMID: 21985878]
[19]
Estrela C, Mamede Neto I, Lopes HP, Estrela CR, Pécora JD. Root canal filling with calcium hydroxide using different techniques. Braz Dent J 2002; 13(1): 53-6.
[PMID: 11870964]
[20]
Takushige T, Cruz EV, Asgor Moral A, Hoshino E. Endodontic treatment of primary teeth using a combination of antibacterial drugs. Int Endod J 2004; 37(2): 132-8.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0143-2885.2004.00771.x ] [PMID: 14871180]
[21]
Sari S, Okte Z. Success rate of Sealapex in root canal treatment for primary teeth: 3-year follow-up. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2008; 105(4): e93-6.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tripleo.2007.12.014 ] [PMID: 18329574]
[22]
Barcelos R, Santos MP, Primo LG, Luiz RR, Maia LC. ZOE paste pulpectomies outcome in primary teeth: a systematic review. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2011; 35(3): 241-8.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.17796/jcpd.35.3.y777187463255n34 ] [PMID: 21678664]
[23]
Subramaniam P, Gilhotra K. Endoflas, zinc oxide eugenol and metapex as root canal filling materials in primary molars--a comparative clinical study. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2011; 35(4): 365-9.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.17796/jcpd.35.4.1377v06621143233 ] [PMID: 22046693]
[24]
Lima CCB, Conde Júnior AM, Rizzo MS, et al. Biocompatibility of root filling pastes used in primary teeth. Int Endod J 2015; 48(5): 405-16.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/iej.12328 ] [PMID: 24889680]
[25]
Pozos-Guillen A, Garcia-Flores A, Esparza-Villalpando V, Garrocho-Rangel A. Intracanal irrigants for pulpectomy in primary teeth: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Paediatr Dent 2016; 26(6): 412-25.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ipd.12228 ] [PMID: 26898157]
[26]
Nadkarni U, Damle SG. Comparative evaluation of calcium hydroxide and zinc oxide eugenol as root canal filling materials for primary molars: a clinical and radiographic study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2000; 18(1): 1-10.
[PMID: 11323998]
[27]
Trairatvorakul C, Chunlasikaiwan S. Success of pulpectomy with zinc oxide eugenol vs calcium hydroxide/iodoform paste in primary molars: A clinical study. Pediatr Dent 2008; 30: 303-8.
[28]
Mortazavi M, Mesbahi M. Comparison of zinc oxide and eugenol, and Vitapex for root canal treatment of necrotic primary teeth. Int J Paediatr Dent 2004; 14(6): 417-24.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-263X.2004.00544.x ] [PMID: 15525310]
[29]
Ballesio I, Campanella V, Gallusi G, Marzo G. Chemical and pharmacological shaping of necrotic primary teeth. Eur J Paediatr Dent 2002; 3(3): 133-40.
[PMID: 12871002]
[30]
Nakornchai S, Banditsing P, Visetratana N. Clinical evaluation of 3Mix and Vitapex as treatment options for pulpally involved primary molars. Int J Paediatr Dent 2010; 20(3): 214-21.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-263X.2010.01044.x ] [PMID: 20409203]
[31]
Ito IY, Junior FM, Paula-Silva FW, Da Silva LA, Leonardo MR. Nelson-Filho. Microbial culture and checkerboard DNA-DNA hybridization assessment of bacteria in root canals of primary teeth pre- and post-endodontic therapy with a calcium hydroxide/chlorhexidine paste. Int J Paediatr Dent 2011; 21: 353.
[32]
Barja-Fidalgo F, Moutinho-Ribeiro M, Oliveira MA, de Oliveira BH. A systematic review of root canal filling materials for deciduous teeth: is there an alternative for zinc oxide-eugenol? ISRN Dent 2011; 2011367318
[http://dx.doi.org/10.5402/2011/367318 ] [PMID: 21991471]
[33]
Nurko C, Garcia Godoy F. Evaluation of a calcium hydroxide/iodoform paste (Vitapex) in root canal therapy for primary teeth. J Clin Pediatr Dent 1999; 23: 289-94.
[34]
Mani SA, Chawla HS, Tewari A, Goyal A. Mani SA, Chawla HS, Tewari A, Goyal A. Evaluation of calcium hydroxide and zinc oxide eugenol as root canal filling materials in primary teeth ASDC J Dent Child 2000; 67(2): 142-147, 83..
[PMID: 10826052]
[35]
Nurko C, Ranly DM, García-Godoy F, Lakshmyya KN. Resorption of a calcium hydroxide/iodoform paste (Vitapex) in root canal therapy for primary teeth: A case report. Pediatr Dent 2000; 22(6): 517-20.
[PMID: 11132515]
[36]
Faria G, Nelson-Filho P, Freitas AC, Assed S, Ito IY. Antibacterial effect of root canal preparation and calcium hydroxide paste (Calen) intracanal dressing in primary teeth with apical periodontitis. J Appl Oral Sci 2005; 13(4): 351-5.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1678-77572005000400007 ] [PMID: 20865218]
[37]
Amorim Lde F, Toledo OA, Estrela CR, Decurcio Dde A, Estrela C. Antimicrobial analysis of different root canal filling pastes used in pediatric dentistry by two experimental methods. Braz Dent J 2006; 17(4): 317-22.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0103-64402006000400010 ] [PMID: 17262146]
[38]
Reddy S, Ramakrishna Y. Evaluation of antimicrobial efficacy of various root canal filling materials used in primary teeth: a microbiological study. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2007; 31(3): 193-8.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.17796/jcpd.31.3.t73r4061424j2578 ] [PMID: 17550046]
[39]
Petel R, Moskovitz M, Tickotsky N, Halabi A, Goldstein J, Houri-Haddad Y. Cytotoxicity and proliferative effects of Iodoform-containing root canal-filling material on RAW 264.7 macrophage and RKO epithelial cell lines. Arch Oral Biol 2013; 58(1): 75-81.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.archoralbio.2012.06.014 ] [PMID: 23123069]
[40]
Torres CP, Apicella MJ, Yancich PP, Parker MH. Intracanal placement of calcium hydroxide: a comparison of techniques, revisited. J Endod 2004; 30(4): 225-7.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00004770-200404000-00010 ] [PMID: 15085051]
[41]
Sigurdsson A, Stancill R, Madison S. Intracanal placement of Ca(OH)2: a comparison of techniques. J Endod 1992; 18(8): 367-70.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0099-2399(06)81220-3 ] [PMID: 1431690]
[42]
Cerqueira DF, Mello Moura AC, Santos EM, Guedes Pinto AC. Cytotoxicity, histopathological, microbiological and clinical aspects of an endodontic iodoform based paste used in pediatric dentistry: A review. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2008; 32: 105-10.
[43]
Trairatvorakul C, Detsomboonrat P. Success rates of a mixture of ciprofloxacin, metronidazole, and minocycline antibiotics used in the non-instrumentation endodontic treatment of mandibular primary molars with carious pulpal involvement. Int J Paediatr Dent 2012; 22(3): 217-27.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-263X.2011.01181.x ] [PMID: 21951271]
[44]
Barr ES, Flatiz CM, Hicks MJ. A retrospective radiographic evaluation of primary molar pulpectomies. Pediatr Dent 1991; 13(1): 4-9.
[PMID: 1945984]
[45]
Lin B, Zhao Y, Yang J, Wang W, Ge LH. Effects of zinc oxide-eugenol and calcium hydroxide/iodoform on delaying root resorption in primary molars without successors. Dent Mater J 2014; 33(4): 471-5.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2014-036 ] [PMID: 25017021]
[46]
Field JW, Gutmann JL, Solomon ES, Rakusin H. A clinical radiographic retrospective assessment of the success rate of single-visit root canal treatment. Int Endod J 2004; 37(1): 70-82.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2004.00765.x ] [PMID: 14870762]
[47]
Dogra S. Comparative evaluation of calcium hydroxide and zinc oxide eugenol as root canal filling materials for primary molars: A clinical and radiographic study. World J Dent 2011; 2: 231-6.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10015-1088]
[48]
Ramar K, Mungara J. Clinical and radiographic evaluation of pulpectomies using three root canal filling materials: an in-vivo study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2010; 28(1): 25-9.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0970-4388.60481 ] [PMID: 20215668]
[49]
Guelmann M, McEachern M, Turner C. Pulpectomies in primary incisors using three delivery systems: an in vitro study. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2004; 28(4): 323-6.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.17796/jcpd.28.4.j634167443m061n3 ] [PMID: 15366621]
[50]
Dandashi MB, Nazif MM, Zullo T, Elliott MA, Schneider LG, Czonstkowsky M. An in vitro comparison of three endodontic techniques for primary incisors. Pediatr Dent 1993; 15(4): 254-6.
[PMID: 8247899]
[51]
Reddy VVS, Shakunthala B. Comparative assessment of three obturating techniques in primary molars: An in vitro study. J Endod 1997; 9: 13-6.
[52]
Kahn FH, Rosenberg PA, Schertzer L, Korthals G, Nguyen PN. An in-vitro evaluation of sealer placement methods. Int Endod J 1997; 30(3): 181-6.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.1997.tb00694.x ] [PMID: 9477802]
[53]
Madan N, Rathnam A, Shigli AL, Indushekar KR. K-file vs Pro files in cleaning capacity and instrumentation time in primary molar root canals: an in vitro study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2011; 29(1): 2-6.
[54]
Asokan S, Sooriaprakas C, Raghu V, Bairavi R. Volumetric analysis of root canal fillings in primary teeth using spiral computed tomography: an in vitro study. J Dent Child (Chic) 2012; 79(2): 46-8.
[PMID: 22828756]
[55]
Smutkeeree A, Phajongviriyatorn P, Komoltri C, Jantarat J. Calcium hydroxide medication in primary molars using different preparations and placement techniques: an in vitro study. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 2015; 16(4): 313-8.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40368-014-0163-7 ] [PMID: 25573787]
[56]
Aylard SR, Johnson R. Assessment of filling techniques for primary teeth. Pediatr Dent 1987; 9(3): 195-8.
[PMID: 3507634]
[57]
Chawla HS, Setia S, Gupta N, Gauba K, Goyal A. Evaluation of a mixture of zinc oxide, calcium hydroxide, and sodium fluoride as a new root canal filling material for primary teeth. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2008; 26(2): 53-8.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0970-4388.41616 ] [PMID: 18603728]
[58]
Moskovitz M, Yahav D, Tickotsky N, Holan G. Long term follow up of root canal treated primary molars. Int J Paediatr Dent 2010; 20: 207-13.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-263X.2010.01038.x]
[59]
Silva LA, Leonardo MR, Nelson-Filho P, Tanomaru JM, Tanomaru JM. Comparison of rotary and manual instrumentation techniques on cleaning capacity and instrumentation time in deciduous molars. J Dent Child (Chic) 2004; 71(1): 45-7.
[PMID: 15272656]
[60]
Gomes GB, Bonow MLM, Carlotto D, Jacinto RDC. In vivo Comparison of the Duration between two Endodontic Instrumentation Techniques in Deciduous Teeth. Brazilian Res Ped Dent Integ Clin 2014; 14(3): 199-205.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.4034/PBOCI.2014.143.04]
[61]
Bawazir OA, Salama FS. Clinical evaluation of root canal obturation methods in primary teeth. Pediatr Dent 2006; 28(1): 39-47.
[PMID: 16615374]
[62]
Wang YL, Chang HH, Hunag GF, Lin CP, Li UM, Guo MK. Application of Ni-Ti rotary files for pulpectomy in primary molars. J Dent Sci 2006; 1(1): 10-5.
[63]
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 2006; 28: 518-23.
[64]
Memarpour M, Shahidi S, Meshki R. Comparison of different obturation techniques for primary molars by digital radiography. Pediatr Dent 2013; 35(3): 236-40.
[PMID: 23756307]
[65]
Ugur I, Hikmet A, Tamer T. Leakage evaluation of three different root canal obturation techniques using electrochemical evaluation and dye penetration evaluation methods. Aust Endod 2007; 33: 18-22.
[66]
Fuks AB, Eidelman E, Pauker N. Root fillings with Endoflas in primary teeth: a retrospective study. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2002; 27(1): 41-5.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.17796/jcpd.27.1.pp237453707386m1 ] [PMID: 12413171]
[67]
Azar MR, Safi L, Nikaein A. Comparison of the cleaning capacity of Mtwo and Pro Taper rotary systems and manual instruments in primary teeth. Dent Res J (Isfahan) 2012; 9(2): 146-51.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/1735-3327.95227 ] [PMID: 22623929]
[68]
de Sousa DL, de Sousa RB, Pinto DN, Neto JJ, de Carvalho CB, de Almeida PC. Antibacterial effects of chemomechanical instrumentation and calcium hydroxide in primary teeth with pulp necrosis. Pediatr Dent 2011; 33(4): 307-11.
[PMID: 21902996]
[69]
Grover R, Mehra M, Pandit IK, Srivastava N, Gugnani N, Gupta M. Clinical efficacy of various root canal obturating methods in primary teeth: a comparative study. Eur J Paediatr Dent 2013; 14(2): 104-8.
[PMID: 23758458]
[70]
Ahmed HM. Anatomical challenges, electronic working length determination and current developments in root canal preparation of primary molar teeth. Int Endod J 2013; 46(11): 1011-22.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/iej.12134 ] [PMID: 23711096]
[71]
Chen X-X, Lin B-C, Zhong J, Ge L-H. . [Degradation evaluation and success of pulpectomy with a modified primary root canal filling in primary molars]. Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao 2015; 47(3): 529-35.
[PMID: 26080888]
[72]
Singh R, Chaudhary S, Manuja N, Chaitra TR, Sinha AA. Evaluation of different root canal obturation methods in primary teeth using cone beam computerized tomography. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2015; 39(5): 462-9.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.17796/1053-4628-39.5.462 ] [PMID: 26551371]
[73]
Vashista K, Sandhu M, Sachdev V. Comparative evaluation of obturating techniques in primary teeth: an in vivo study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2015; 8(3): 176-80.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1309 ] [PMID: 26628851]
[74]
Neelakandan P, Sharma S. Pain after single visit root canal treatment with two singles file systems based on different kinematics: A prospective randomized multicentre clinical study. Clin Oral Investig 2015; 19: 2211-7.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-015-1448-x]
[75]
Govindaraju L, Jeevanandan G, Subramanian EMG. Clinical evaluation of quality of obturation and instrumentation time using two modified rotary file systems with manual instrumentation in primary teeth. J Clin Diagn Res 2017; 11: ZC55-8.

Rights & Permissions Print Cite
Article Metrics
42
© 2024 Bentham Science Publishers | Privacy Policy