Premium
Apical extrusion of bacteria when using reciprocating single‐file and rotary multifile instrumentation systems
Author(s) -
Tinoco J. M.,
DeDeus G.,
Tinoco E. M. B.,
Saavedra F.,
Fidel R. A. S.,
Sassone L. M.
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
international endodontic journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.988
H-Index - 119
eISSN - 1365-2591
pISSN - 0143-2885
DOI - 10.1111/iej.12187
Subject(s) - reciprocating motion , apical foramen , enterococcus faecalis , dentistry , materials science , agar plate , bacteria , biology , root canal , medicine , bearing (navigation) , computer science , artificial intelligence , genetics , staphylococcus aureus
Aim To evaluate ex vivo, apical bacterial extrusion associated with two reciprocating single‐file systems (WaveOne and Reciproc) compared with a conventional multifile rotary system (BioRace). Methodology Forty‐five human single‐rooted mandibular incisors were used. Endodontic access cavities were prepared, and root canals were contaminated with an Enterococcus faecalis suspension. Following incubation at 37 °C for thirty days, the contaminated teeth were divided into three groups of 15 specimens each (G1 – Reciproc, G2 – WaveOne and G3 – BioRace). Positive and negative controls consisted of 5 infected teeth and 3 uninfected incisors that were instrumented with one of the tested NiTi systems, respectively. Bacteria extruded from the apical foramen during instrumentation were collected into vials containing 0.9% NaCl. The microbiological samples were taken from the vials and incubated in brain heart agar medium for 24 h. The resulting bacterial titre, in colony‐forming units ( CFU ) per mL, was determined, and these data were analysed by Wilcoxon matched‐pairs signed rank test and Kruskal–Wallis H‐test. The level of significance was set at α = 0.05. Results No significant difference was found in the number of CFU between the two reciprocating systems ( P = 0.41). The conventional multifile rotary system group was associated with significantly higher CFU than both of the two reciprocating groups ( P = 0.01). Conclusions All instrumentation systems extruded bacteria beyond the foramen. However, both reciprocating single‐file systems extruded fewer bacteria apically than the conventional multifile rotary system.