Conservative Dentistry and Endodontic Journal

Register      Login

VOLUME 5 , ISSUE 1 ( January-June, 2020 ) > List of Articles

Original Article

Comparative Evaluation of Dentinal Microcrack Formation by Single Reciprocating File Systems: An In Vitro Study

Ashitha T Kulangara, A Devadathan, Jose Jacob, Manuja Nair

Citation Information : Kulangara AT, Devadathan A, Jacob J, Nair M. Comparative Evaluation of Dentinal Microcrack Formation by Single Reciprocating File Systems: An In Vitro Study. Cons Dent Endod J 2020; 5 (1):1-4.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10048-0057

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 30-11-2020

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2020; The Author(s).


Introduction: The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare and evaluate the formation of dentinal microcracks after root canal preparation while using four single reciprocating file systems [WaveOne (WO), Reciproc (RC), WaveOne Gold (WOG), Reciproc Blue (RCB)]. Materials and methods: Seventy-five extracted mandibular premolars were randomly selected. A total of 15 teeth were left unprepared and served as control, and the remaining 60 teeth were divided into four groups. WaveOne files, Reciproc files, WaveOne Gold files, and Reciproc Blue files were used to prepare the canals. Roots were then sectioned at 3, 6, and 9 mm from the apex and the cut surface was observed under the scanning electron microscope (SEM) for the presence of dentinal microcracks. Results: The control group were not associated with microcracks, while all the single file systems tested resulted in dentinal microcrack formation. Among the groups, tooth prepared with WaveOne Gold and Reciproc Blue files showed fewer cracks than other experimental groups; however, no significant difference was found between them (p > 0.05). Conclusion: Root canal preparation with reciprocating files resulted in dentinal microcracks. WaveOne Gold and Reciproc Blue files caused less microcracks than WaveOne and Reciproc files. Heat-treated instrument produced less microcracks than M-wire instruments.

  1. Versiani MA, Souza E, De-Deus G. Critical appraisal of studies on dentinal radicular microcracks in endodontics: methodological issues, contemporary concepts, and future perspectives. Endodon Topics 2015;33(1):87–156. DOI: 10.1111/etp.12091.
  2. Tsesis I, Rosen E, Tamse A, et al. Diagnosis of vertical root fractures in endodontically treated teeth based on clinical and radiographic indices: a systematic review. J Endod 2010;36(9):1455–1458. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2010.05.003.
  3. Kim Y, Chang S-W, Lee J-K, et al. A micro-computed tomography study of canal configuration of multiple-canalled mesiobuccal root of maxillary first molar. Clin Oral Investig 2013;17(6):1541–1546. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-012-0852-8.
  4. Yoldas O, Yilmaz S, Atakan G, et al. Dentinal microcrack formation during root canal preparations by different NiTi rotary instruments and the self-adjusting file. J Endod 2012;38(2):232–235. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2011.10.011.
  5. Sim TPC, Knowles JC, Ng Y-L, et al. Effect of sodium hypochlorite on mechanical properties of dentine and tooth surface strain. Int Endod J 2001(2):13. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.2001.00357.x.
  6. Wu M-K, van der Sluis LWM, Wesselink PR. Comparison of mandibular premolars and canines with respect to their resistance to vertical root fracture. J Dent 2004;32(4):265–268. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2003.12.002.
  7. Kishen A. Mechanisms and risk factors for fracture predilection in endodontically treated teeth. Endod Top 2006;13(1):57–83. DOI: 10.1111/j.1601-1546.2006.00201.x.
  8. Kishen A, Kumar GV, Chen N-N. Stress-strain response in human dentine: rethinking fracture predilection in postcore restored teeth. Dent Traumatol 2004;20(2):90–100. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-4469.2004.00250.x.
  9. Onnink PA, Davis RD, Wayman BE. An in vitro comparison of incomplete root fractures associated with three obturation techniques. J Endod 1994;20(1):32–37. DOI: 10.1016/s0099-2399(06)80024-5.
  10. Shemesh H, Bier CAS, Wu M-K, et al. The effects of canal preparation and filling on the incidence of dentinal defects. Int Endod J 2009;42(3):208–213. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2008.01502.x.
  11. Bier CAS, Shemesh H, Tanomaru-Filho M, et al. The ability of different nickel-titanium rotary instruments to induce dentinal damage during canal preparation. J Endod 2009;35(2):236–238. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2008.10.021.
  12. Kwak SW, Lee CJ, Kim SK, et al. Comparison of screw-in forces during movement of endodontic files with different geometries, alloys, and kinetics. Mater 2019;12(9):1506. DOI: 10.3390/ma12091506.
  13. Plotino G, Grande NM, Testarelli L, et al. Cyclic fatigue of reciproc and WaveOne reciprocating instruments: cyclic fatigue of reciprocating instruments. Int Endod J 2012;45(7):614–618. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2012.02015.x.
  14. Varela-Patiño P, Ibañez-Párraga A, Rivas-Mundiña B, et al. Alternating versus continuous rotation: a comparative study of the effect on instrument life. J Endod 2010;36(1):157–159. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2009.09.023.
  15. Burklein S, Hinschitza K, Dammaschke T, et al. Shaping ability and cleaning effectiveness of two single-file systems in severely curved root canals of extracted teeth: reciproc and WaveOne versus Mtwo and ProTaper. Int Endod J 2012;45(5):449–461. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2011.01996.x.
  16. Berutti E, Paolino DS, Chiandussi G, et al. Root canal anatomy preservation of WaveOne reciprocating files with or without glide path. J Endod 2012;38(1):101–104. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2011. 09.030.
  17. Özyürek T, Yılmaz K, Uslu G. Shaping ability of Reciproc, WaveOne GOLD, and HyFlex EDM single-file systems in simulated S-shaped canals. J Endod 2017;43(5):805–809. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2016. 12.010.
  18. Ashwinkumar V, Krithikadatta J, Surendran S, et al. Effect of reciprocating file motion on microcrack formation in root canals: an SEM study. Int Endod J 2014;47(7):622–627. DOI: 10.1111/iej.12197.
  19. Burklein STP, Schafer E. Incidence of dentinal defects after root canal preparation: reciprocating versus rotary instrumentation. J Endod 2013;39(4):501–504. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2012.11.045.
  20. Pawar AM, Thakur B, Kfir A, et al. Dentinal defects induced by 6 different endodontic files when used for oval root canals: an in vitro comparative study. Restorat Dentis Endodont 2019;44(3):e31. DOI: 10.5395/rde.2019.44.e31.
  21. Cakici F, Cakici EB, Sadik B, et al. Comparison of newly formed microcracks after instrumentation using Protaper next, Reciproc and self-adjusting file systems. Eur Oral Res 2019;53(1):21. DOI: 10.26650/eor.201972917418.
  22. Tang YH, Xu R, Zhu Q, et al. Comparison of dentinal microcracks formation in severely curved root canal with different Ni-Ti instruments. Shang J Stomatol 2019;28(6):581.
  23. Alapati SB, Brantley WA, Iijima M, et al. Metallurgical characterization of a new nickel-titanium wire for rotary endodontic instruments. J Endod 2009;35(11):1589–1593. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2009.08.004.
  24. Plotino G, Grande NM, Testarelli L, et al. Cyclic fatigue of reciproc and Reciproc blue nickel-titanium reciprocating files at different environmental temperatures. J Endod 2018;44(10):1549–1552. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2018.06.006.
  25. Topçuoğlu HS, Düzgün S, Aktı A, et al. Laboratory comparison of cyclic fatigue resistance of WaveOne gold, Reciproc and WaveOne files in canals with a double curvature. Int Endod J 2017;50(7):713–717. DOI: 10.1111/iej.12674.
  26. Zupanc J, Vahdat-Pajouh N, Schäfer E. New thermomechanically treated NiTi alloys–a review. Int Endod J 2018;51(10):1088–1103. DOI: 10.1111/iej.12924.
  27. Berman LH, Hartwell GR. Diagnosis Hargreaves KM, Cohen S, ed. Pathways of the pulp. St Louis, MO, USA: Mosby Elsevier; 2011. pp. 2–39.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.