It has been recently noted that motorized files extruded less debris and required less instrumentation time compared to traditional K-files, which could benefit paediatric patients with root canal treatment needs, as published in the Scientific Reports.
All endodontic instrumentation methods have a tendency to push debris through the apical foramen and into the periapical tissues. Such debris may consist of necrotic pulp tissue, dentin chips and bacteria. Extrusion of such debris may induce postoperative pain and inflammation and may inhibit periapical healing.
A growing body of literature has recognized the importance of reducing apically extruded debris. Estimating the root canal length just short of the apex, using an electronic apex locator, would also seem helpful in reducing the chance of extruding debris beyond the apex.
The extent of debris extrusion and the time required for instrumentation of the canals of primary teeth using motarized files have not been reported to date.
Therefore, Bhaggyashri A. Pawar and colleagues from the Department of Oral Health and Advanced Dentistry, Sir H. N. Reliance Foundation Hospital and Research Centre, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India aimed to measure and compare the amount of apically extruded debris using Kedo-S paediatric rotary and the new XP-endo Shaper files, both of which are operated by an endo-motor (motorized) and to compare both to traditional hand-operated K-files.
Measuring the time required to complete the bio-mechanical preparation by these three files was a second goal of the present study.
Forty-five extracted primary canines were randomly assigned to three instrumentation groups (n = 15): Hand K-files; and the motorized Kedo-S files and XP-endo Shaper files. The apically extruded debris produced during the procedure was collected and dried in pre-weighed Eppendorf tubes, and the mass of debris was calculated.
The time required for the endodontic procedure was also recorded. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's post hoc test were used with a significance level set at 5%.
The findings highlighted that –
a. XP-endo Shaper and Kedo-S files extruded significantly less debris compared with hand K-files with means of 0.84 ± 0.31 and 1.20 ± 0.67 mg respectively, compared to 2.13 ± 0.31 mg (p < 0.0001).
b. No significant difference was found between the two motorized files.
c. Less time was required to complete the procedure with the XP-endo Shaper compared to the hand K-files (p < 0.0001) and Kedo-S files (p < 0.0001).
Hence, the authors concluded that "motorized files extruded less debris and required less instrumentation time compared to traditional K-files, which could benefit paediatric patients with root canal treatment needs."
Disclaimer: This website is primarily for healthcare professionals. The content here does not replace medical advice and should not be used as medical, diagnostic, endorsement, treatment, or prescription advice. Medical science evolves rapidly, and we strive to keep our information current. If you find any discrepancies, please contact us at corrections@medicaldialogues.in. Read our Correction Policy here. Nothing here should be used as a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. We do not endorse any healthcare advice that contradicts a physician's guidance. Use of this site is subject to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and Advertisement Policy. For more details, read our Full Disclaimer here.
NOTE: Join us in combating medical misinformation. If you encounter a questionable health, medical, or medical education claim, email us at factcheck@medicaldialogues.in for evaluation.