Evaluation of apical seal in endodontically filled teeth using different root canal preparation techniques

B. Al-Dulaimi, Enas; K. Al-Hashimi, Majida

	Evaluation of apical seal in endodontically filled teeth using different root canal preparation techniques
Journal of baghdad college of dentistry
Article 1, Volume 21, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 6-11
Authors
Enas B. Al-Dulaimi; Majida K. Al-Hashimi
Abstract
ABSTRACTBackground: The main objectives of endodontic treatment are to remove the contents and irregularities from the rootcanal, and to shape the canal to facilitate placement of the obturating materials. Aims of the study were to evaluate theeffect of different instrumentation techniques on spreader penetration depth, and to evaluate the effect of the spreaderpenetration depth on the apical seal using stainless-steel and nickel-titanium finger spreaders.Methods and Materials: Eighty extracted human teeth, with single and curved canals, were prepared by step-back, stepbackwith Gates-Glidden burs, crown-down pressureless and standardized-taper root canal preparation techniques. Allteeth were obturated with gutta percha and sealer using stainless-steel and nickel-titanium finger spreaders for lateralcondensation, the depth of spreader penetration was measured. The apical 3-4 mm of all teeth was submerged in Pelikanink for 48 hours then splitted longitudinally for linear measurement of dye penetration through the apical foramen.Results: Step-back with Gates-Glidden technique scored the least differences in spreader penetration depths and dyepenetration, when compared with step-back technique, crown-down pressureless technique, and standardized-tapertechnique. Standardized-taper technique showed statistically greater differences concerning spreader penetration depthand apical microleakage. No significant differences were found between step-back and crown-down pressurelesstechniques.Highly significant differences were evident when nickel-titanium and stainless-steel spreaders were compared in the stepbacktechnique, step-back with Gates-Glidden technique, and standardized-taper technique, and there was a significantdifference when they were compared in crown-down pressureless technique.Conclusions: Regarding the differences between spreader penetration depths and apical leakage, step-back techniquewith Gates-Glidden burs scored the best results when it was compared to the other groups. The quality of the apical sealwas related directly to the method of canal preparation. Step-back with Gates-Glidden technique, which permitteddeeper penetration of the spreader, resulted in a seal closer to the prepared length. Nickel-titanium spreader penetrateddeeper and provided better apical seal than stainless-steel spreader.Key words: root canal preparation techniques, apical seal, nickel-titanium and stainless-steel spreaders. (J Bagh CollDentistry 2009; 21(4):6-11)

Statistics Article View: 19 PDF Download: 11