The incidence of root microcracks caused by 3 different single-file systems versus the ProTaper system

Authors: R. Liu, B. Xiang Hou, Paul R. Wesselink, M. - K. Wu, H. Shemesh
Year: 2013
Rubrics: Microcracks
Keywords: root cracks, microcracks, micro-cracks, canal transportation

Introduction The aim of this study was to compare the incidence of root cracks observed at the apical root surface and/or in the canal wall after canal instrumentation with 3 single-file systems and the ProTaper system (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland).

Methods One hundred mandibular incisors were selected. Twenty control teeth were coronally flared with Gates-Glidden drills (Dentsply Maillefer). No further preparation was made. The other 80 teeth were mounted in resin blocks with simulated periodontal ligaments, and the apex was exposed. They were divided into 4 experimental groups (n = 20); the root canals were first coronally flared with Gates-Glidden drills and then instrumented to the full working length with the ProTaper, OneShape (Micro- Mega, Besancon, France), Reciproc (VDW, Munich, Germany), or the Self-Adjusting File (ReDent-Nova, Ra’anana, Israel). The apical root surface and horizontal sections 2, 4, and 6 mm from the apex were observed under a microscope. The presence of cracks was noted. The chi-square testwas performed to compare the appearance of cracked roots between the experimental groups.

Results No cracks were found in the control teeth and teeth instrumented with the Self-Adjusting File. Cracks were found in 10 of 20 (50%), 7 of 20 (35%), and 1 of 20 (5%) teeth after canal instrumentation with the Pro- Taper, OneShape, and Reciproc files, respectively. The difference between the experimental groups was statistically significant (P < .001).

Conclusions Nickel-titanium instruments may cause cracks on the apical root surface or in the canal wall; the Self-Adjusting File and Reciproc files caused less cracks than the ProTaper and OneShape files.

Link to study: 

Back to list

No thanks