The impact of minimally invasive root canal preparation strategies on the ability to shape root canals of mandibular molars

Abstract

Lima CO, Barbosa AFA, Ferreira CM, Augusto CM, Sassone LM, Lopes RT, Fidel SR, Silva EJNL. The impact of minimally invasive root canal preparation strategies on the ability to shape root canals of mandibular molars.

Influence of ultraconservative access cavities on instrumentation efficacy with XP‐endo Shaper and Reciproc, filling ability and load capacity of mandibular molars subjected to thermomechanical cycling

“…The percentage of unprepared canal area was significantly greater in the UltraAC groups when compared to the TradAC groups. This result is in line with previous studies (Krishan et al 2014, Barbosa et al 2020, which reported higher values for unprepared areas in ConsAC groups in comparison with TradAC groups. Moreover, no difference was found between the instruments, indicating the ability of XP to expand and adapt to the root canal lumen, contacting more areas within the root canals, similar to instruments with greater tapers, such as Reciproc.…”

“…Despite a lower percentage of dentine being removed in the UltraAC groups, the load capacity was similar between both access cavities and systems used for root canal preparation. This result is in line with previous studies that evaluated TradAC and minimally access modalities (Moore et al 2016, Rover et al 2017, Augusto et al 2020, Barbosa et al 2020, Silva et al 2020a. Nonetheless, a previous study (Saberi et al 2020) demonstrated greater load capacity in thermocycled mandibular molars with truss access cavities in comparison with TradAC.…”

“…This design of cavity, also known as 'ninja' access, consists of a small access opening at the central fossa of the occlusal surface of molar teeth created with small calibre burs for maximum preservation of the pulp chamber roof (Plotino et al 2017, Silva et al 2020a. Previous studies have reported conflicting results regarding the influence of the access cavity on fracture resistance of root filled teeth: whilst some found that conservative access cavities (ConsAC) were associated with greater resistance to fracture when compared to TradAC (Krishan et al 2014, Plotino et al 2017, most of the studies have failed to demonstrate differences between TradAC and minimally invasive cavities (Moore et al 2016, Chlup et al 2017, Rover et al 2017, Neelakantan et al 2018, € Ozy€ urek et al 2018, Sabeti et al 2018, Augusto et al 2020, Barbosa et al 2020, Silva et al 2020a). However, making the access too small may compromise subsequent stages of root canal treatment, for example making canal detection more challenging (Rover et al 2017, Saygili et al 2018, and having a negative impact on optimum cleaning (Neelakantan et al 2018), shaping ability (Krishan et al 2014) and filling procedures (Barbosa et al 2020, Silva et al 2020a).…”

“…Previous studies have reported conflicting results regarding the influence of the access cavity on fracture resistance of root filled teeth: whilst some found that conservative access cavities (ConsAC) were associated with greater resistance to fracture when compared to TradAC (Krishan et al 2014, Plotino et al 2017, most of the studies have failed to demonstrate differences between TradAC and minimally invasive cavities (Moore et al 2016, Chlup et al 2017, Rover et al 2017, Neelakantan et al 2018, € Ozy€ urek et al 2018, Sabeti et al 2018, Augusto et al 2020, Barbosa et al 2020, Silva et al 2020a). However, making the access too small may compromise subsequent stages of root canal treatment, for example making canal detection more challenging (Rover et al 2017, Saygili et al 2018, and having a negative impact on optimum cleaning (Neelakantan et al 2018), shaping ability (Krishan et al 2014) and filling procedures (Barbosa et al 2020, Silva et al 2020a). Moreover, these new access cavity designs can also increase the prevalence of iatrogenic complications such as canal transportation, perforation and/ or instrument fracture (Eaton et al 2015, Rover et al 2017, Alovisi et al 2018, Neelakantan et al 2018, 2020a.…”

Shaping ability of four single-file systems in the instrumentation of second mesiobuccal canals of three-dimensional printed maxillary first molars

“…XP-endo Shaper (XPS; FKG Dent ire SA, La Chaux-de-Fonds, Switzerland) and M3-L (Yirui, China) are another two single-file systems, but operations in rotary movement. The XPS instrument takes on a snake-shaped form with a triangular cross-section, and combines the MaxWire alloy technology and the Booster tip with a six-blade tip (12,16,17,(19)(20)(21). M3-L is made of heat-treated alloy (M-wire), and has a double S-shape cross-section with 2 cutting flutes and a non-cutting tip (22).…”