Apical enlargement according to different pecking times at working length using reciprocating files

Hyo Jin Jeon, Avina Paranjpe, Jung Hong Ha, EuiSeong Kim, Woocheol Lee, Hyeon Cheol Kim

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

17 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Introduction The purpose of this study was to evaluate the apical preparation sizes resulting from repetitive pecking motions at the working length (WL) by using reciprocating files. Methods Sixty simulated endodontic training blocks with a J-shaped root canal were instrumented using Reciproc R25 (VDW, Munich, Germany) or WaveOne Primary (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland) (n = 30 each). Each group was divided into 3 subgroups based on the repetitive pecking times at the WL: 1, 2, and 4 times. All specimens were prepared by 1 operator who was competent in instrumenting canals with both file systems. All of the procedures, including the WL measurement, were performed under an operating microscope. The replica of the prepared canal was taken with silicone impression material. After 24 hours of allowing the impression to set, each sample was evaluated under a scanning electron microscope at the apical tip, and the apical preparation size (diameter) was measured at the D0 level of the impression. The data were analyzed statistically using 2-way analysis of variance and the Tukey post hoc test at P =.05. Results The mean diameter (μm) varied between 253 and 274 and between 258 and 277 for Reciproc and WaveOne, respectively, without significant differences. However, more repetitive pecking motions at the WL resulted in a significantly larger apical preparation size than the subgroups with less pecking times (P <.05). Conclusions Under the conditions of this study, the results indicate that a greater number of repetitive pecking times at the WL may result in an apical preparation size that is larger than the actual file size.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)281-284
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of Endodontics
Volume40
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2014 Feb 1

Fingerprint

Dental Pulp Cavity
Endodontics
Silicones
Switzerland
Germany
Analysis of Variance
Electrons
CMW cement

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Dentistry(all)
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Jeon, Hyo Jin ; Paranjpe, Avina ; Ha, Jung Hong ; Kim, EuiSeong ; Lee, Woocheol ; Kim, Hyeon Cheol. / Apical enlargement according to different pecking times at working length using reciprocating files. In: Journal of Endodontics. 2014 ; Vol. 40, No. 2. pp. 281-284.
@article{0225f431935746bead011aeb363e5224,
title = "Apical enlargement according to different pecking times at working length using reciprocating files",
abstract = "Introduction The purpose of this study was to evaluate the apical preparation sizes resulting from repetitive pecking motions at the working length (WL) by using reciprocating files. Methods Sixty simulated endodontic training blocks with a J-shaped root canal were instrumented using Reciproc R25 (VDW, Munich, Germany) or WaveOne Primary (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland) (n = 30 each). Each group was divided into 3 subgroups based on the repetitive pecking times at the WL: 1, 2, and 4 times. All specimens were prepared by 1 operator who was competent in instrumenting canals with both file systems. All of the procedures, including the WL measurement, were performed under an operating microscope. The replica of the prepared canal was taken with silicone impression material. After 24 hours of allowing the impression to set, each sample was evaluated under a scanning electron microscope at the apical tip, and the apical preparation size (diameter) was measured at the D0 level of the impression. The data were analyzed statistically using 2-way analysis of variance and the Tukey post hoc test at P =.05. Results The mean diameter (μm) varied between 253 and 274 and between 258 and 277 for Reciproc and WaveOne, respectively, without significant differences. However, more repetitive pecking motions at the WL resulted in a significantly larger apical preparation size than the subgroups with less pecking times (P <.05). Conclusions Under the conditions of this study, the results indicate that a greater number of repetitive pecking times at the WL may result in an apical preparation size that is larger than the actual file size.",
author = "Jeon, {Hyo Jin} and Avina Paranjpe and Ha, {Jung Hong} and EuiSeong Kim and Woocheol Lee and Kim, {Hyeon Cheol}",
year = "2014",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.joen.2013.08.020",
language = "English",
volume = "40",
pages = "281--284",
journal = "Journal of Endodontics",
issn = "0099-2399",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "2",

}

Apical enlargement according to different pecking times at working length using reciprocating files. / Jeon, Hyo Jin; Paranjpe, Avina; Ha, Jung Hong; Kim, EuiSeong; Lee, Woocheol; Kim, Hyeon Cheol.

In: Journal of Endodontics, Vol. 40, No. 2, 01.02.2014, p. 281-284.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Apical enlargement according to different pecking times at working length using reciprocating files

AU - Jeon, Hyo Jin

AU - Paranjpe, Avina

AU - Ha, Jung Hong

AU - Kim, EuiSeong

AU - Lee, Woocheol

AU - Kim, Hyeon Cheol

PY - 2014/2/1

Y1 - 2014/2/1

N2 - Introduction The purpose of this study was to evaluate the apical preparation sizes resulting from repetitive pecking motions at the working length (WL) by using reciprocating files. Methods Sixty simulated endodontic training blocks with a J-shaped root canal were instrumented using Reciproc R25 (VDW, Munich, Germany) or WaveOne Primary (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland) (n = 30 each). Each group was divided into 3 subgroups based on the repetitive pecking times at the WL: 1, 2, and 4 times. All specimens were prepared by 1 operator who was competent in instrumenting canals with both file systems. All of the procedures, including the WL measurement, were performed under an operating microscope. The replica of the prepared canal was taken with silicone impression material. After 24 hours of allowing the impression to set, each sample was evaluated under a scanning electron microscope at the apical tip, and the apical preparation size (diameter) was measured at the D0 level of the impression. The data were analyzed statistically using 2-way analysis of variance and the Tukey post hoc test at P =.05. Results The mean diameter (μm) varied between 253 and 274 and between 258 and 277 for Reciproc and WaveOne, respectively, without significant differences. However, more repetitive pecking motions at the WL resulted in a significantly larger apical preparation size than the subgroups with less pecking times (P <.05). Conclusions Under the conditions of this study, the results indicate that a greater number of repetitive pecking times at the WL may result in an apical preparation size that is larger than the actual file size.

AB - Introduction The purpose of this study was to evaluate the apical preparation sizes resulting from repetitive pecking motions at the working length (WL) by using reciprocating files. Methods Sixty simulated endodontic training blocks with a J-shaped root canal were instrumented using Reciproc R25 (VDW, Munich, Germany) or WaveOne Primary (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland) (n = 30 each). Each group was divided into 3 subgroups based on the repetitive pecking times at the WL: 1, 2, and 4 times. All specimens were prepared by 1 operator who was competent in instrumenting canals with both file systems. All of the procedures, including the WL measurement, were performed under an operating microscope. The replica of the prepared canal was taken with silicone impression material. After 24 hours of allowing the impression to set, each sample was evaluated under a scanning electron microscope at the apical tip, and the apical preparation size (diameter) was measured at the D0 level of the impression. The data were analyzed statistically using 2-way analysis of variance and the Tukey post hoc test at P =.05. Results The mean diameter (μm) varied between 253 and 274 and between 258 and 277 for Reciproc and WaveOne, respectively, without significant differences. However, more repetitive pecking motions at the WL resulted in a significantly larger apical preparation size than the subgroups with less pecking times (P <.05). Conclusions Under the conditions of this study, the results indicate that a greater number of repetitive pecking times at the WL may result in an apical preparation size that is larger than the actual file size.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84892973836&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84892973836&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.joen.2013.08.020

DO - 10.1016/j.joen.2013.08.020

M3 - Article

VL - 40

SP - 281

EP - 284

JO - Journal of Endodontics

JF - Journal of Endodontics

SN - 0099-2399

IS - 2

ER -