No abstract

Context:Postoperative pain control after endodontic treatment is important to maintain patient comfort.Aim:The aim of this prospective clinical study was to evaluate the postoperative symptomatology of endodontic treatments performed in a single session, with or without photodynamic therapy (PDT), using Reciproc #40 file in necrotic unirradicular anterior teeth.Materials and Methods:In a prospective clinical study, 40 teeth indicated for endodontic treatment were treated by a single endodontist according to a preestablished protocol. The teeth were randomly divided into two groups (n = 20): control group (CG) and laser group (LG). After 24 h, 72 h, and 1 week of endodontic treatment, patients' pain symptomatology was evaluated through a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) ranging from 0 to 10, in which 0 corresponds to no pain and 10 indicates extreme pain. In both workgroups, similar protocols were used for instrumentation with the Reciproc system (R40), irrigation with 2.5% sodium hypochlorite, and filling by the gutta-percha plastification technique, in which the CG did not use PDT, and the LG used PDT after the instrumentation sequence. After the visit, the patients were given a prescription for ibuprofen 400 mg to be taken every 6 h if they experienced pain.Results:The results of the study, analyzing the VAS, did not show any difference in pain symptoms between the groups at 24 h, 72 h, and 1 week (P > 0.05).Conclusions:It was concluded that there was no statistical difference between the groups.

Aim: This study evaluated the effectiveness of the mechanical reduction of intracanal bacteria produced by the endodontic systems Reciproc Blue (VDW GmbH), XP-Endo Shaper (FKG Dentaire) and ProTaper Next (Dentsply Sirona Endodontics) in severely curved canals by culture analysis. Methodology: Fifty severely curved mesiobuccal canals of mandibular molars were selected and instrumented. Following this, six specimens were selected as control, while 44 canals were contaminated with Enterococcus faecalis strains (ATCC 29212). Specimens were incubated for 21 days at 37 ºC. Then, contaminated specimens were randomly divided into 3 groups (n=14): ProTaper Next (G1), XP-Endo Shaper (G2) and Reciproc Blue (G3). Control Group: Six non-contaminated canals were prepared with one of the 3 file systems (n=2). Microbial samples were obtained before (S1) and after root canal preparation (S2). Two roots were observed using scanning electron microscopy to verify biofilm formation.  Quantitative culture analyses of intracanal E. faecalis reduction was performed using CFUs, and the Wilcoxon test was used for intragroup analysis, and intergroup analysis was performed using Kruskal-Wallis test. The level of significance for all analyses was set at P < .05. Results: All systems presented effective bacterial reduction (p<0.05), but still had bacterial growth. ProTaper Next displayed the highest E. faecalis reduction (P<0.05), while XP-Endo Shaper and Reciproc Blue systems presented similar results (P>0.05). ProTaper Next showed the greatest antibacterial action when compared to the XP-Endo Shaper and Reciproc Blue systems. Conclusion: No instrumentation system rendered root canals completely free from bacteria.

Objetivo: A limpeza e modelagem do canal radicular são etapas importantes do tratamento endodôntico, e pode influenciar no sucesso final do tratamento. O objetivo deste estudo foi comparar a modelagem dos instrumentos reciprocantes Wave One Gold (WOG – Dentisply, Maillefer, Baillagues, Suiça) e W-File (WF – TDK, Shenzlen superfine Technology Co, China) em canais radiculares simulados. Materiais e Métodos: foram utilizados 20 blocos de acrílico, divididos em dois grupos (n=10): grupo 1 - WOG; grupo 2 – WF. Antes do preparo do canal radicular, a patência dos canais foi verificada com uma lima K #10. Imagens fotográficas do pré e pós-operatório foram obtidas para posterior sobreposição e análise em software de imagem (Adobe Photoshop CS5.1). A análise estatística foi feita utilizando teste T e o teste Mann Whitney. Resultados: mais resina foi removida do lado externo da curva pelo instrumento Wave One Gold em todos os pontos examinados (p < 0.05). Em relação ao transporte do canal, houve diferenças significativas no orifício do canal (p < 0,05). O instrumento Wave One Gold apresentou preparos mais largos. Concluiu-se que tanto o instrumento Wave One Gold, tanto W-File são seguros para uso em canais curvos, promovendo boa limpeza e modelagem, sendo que o WF obteve preparos mais conservadores.

No abstract