RESUMEN
PURPOSES: This study aimed to assess the current status of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) education in Brazilian undergraduate Endodontic programs. METHODS: One hundred program directors were emailed. The questionnaire asked whether the CBCT topic was included in the program, the availability of a CBCT machine, and, the total length of the dental program. For the group that does not teach, seven questions discussed the reasons for not teaching and whether another subject included this topic. For the programs that included CBCT, seven questions discussed the number of hours included, and the impression of the program directors with the quality of the teaching. The chi-square test was used for the correlation between the availability of the CBCT machine and the length of the dental program with the inclusion of the topic. RESULTS: Thirty-five program directors replied to the questionnaire. Twenty-six (74.3%) reported that the topic of CBCT is not included in their programs. There was no impact of the availability of a CBCT machine on the inclusion of the topic (p > 0.05). The increased length of the dental program decreased the inclusion of the topic (p < 0.05). Fifty percent of the directors replied that lack of time is the reason for not including the topic. Among the programs that include CBCT, the majority (55.6%) deliver 3-5 h of lectures. The practical activities range from 1 to 5 h or more. The majority (77.8%) of the directors are satisfied with the content delivered and 44.4% understand that the students are competent in the interpretation of CBCT images. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of the Endodontic undergraduate programs in Brazil do not include CBCT in the program. The availability of a CBCT machine does not impact the inclusion of the topic, the increased duration of the dental program decreases the inclusion of the CBCT topic.
Asunto(s)
Endodoncia , Estudiantes , Humanos , Brasil , Tomografía Computarizada de Haz Cónico , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Internet , Endodoncia/educaciónRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the fracture incidence of Reciproc R25 instruments (VDW) used during non-surgical root canal retreatments performed by students in a postgraduate endodontic program. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From the analysis of clinical record cards and periapical radiographs of root canal retreatments performed by postgraduate students using the Reciproc R25, a total of 1,016 teeth (2,544 root canals) were selected. The instruments were discarded after a single use. The general incidence of instrument fractures and its frequency was analyzed considering the group of teeth and the root thirds where the fractures occurred. Statistical analysis was performed using the χ2 test (p < 0.01). RESULTS: Seven instruments were separated during the procedures. The percentage of fracture in relation to the number of instrumented canals was 0.27% and 0.68% in relation to the number of instrumented teeth. Four fractures occurred in maxillary molars, 1 in a mandibular molar, 1 in a mandibular premolar and 1 in a maxillary incisor. A greater number of fractures was observed in molars when compared with the number of fractures observed in the other dental groups (p < 0.01). Considering all of the instrument fractures, 71.43% were located in the apical third and 28.57% in the middle third (p < 0.01). One instrument fragment was removed, one bypassed, while in 5 cases, the instrument fragment remained inside the root canal. CONCLUSIONS: The use of Reciproc R25 instruments in root canal retreatments carried out by postgraduate students was associated with a low incidence of fractures.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: This review aimed to evaluate clinical studies that assessed separated NiTi rotary and reciprocating instruments. DESIGN AND METHODS: This review assessed clinical studies involving treatments performed by undergraduate students, graduate students, and endodontic specialists. This review evaluated studies using rotary instruments, reciprocating instruments, and hybrid techniques. The number of uses of the different NiTi rotary and reciprocating systems was also assessed. RESULTS: The incidence of separation for rotary instruments ranged from 0% to 23%. Rotary instruments were used from 1 to 50 times depending on the instrument and tooth type. The lowest rate of incidence separation for rotary instruments was obtained by undergraduate students, using a hybrid technique. The separation incidence for reciprocating instruments ranged from 0% to 1.71%. Reciprocating instruments were mostly single-used; one study reported their use up to 3 times. Separation rate in reciprocating instruments was similar in single-use or in multiple uses 0.2%. CONCLUSIONS: Separation of instruments has dropped recently and seems to be a minor problem in current Endodontics. Multiple uses of NiTi rotary instruments are a possibility without significantly increasing the risk of instrument separation. Single and multiple uses of NiTi reciprocating instruments are also associated with low incidence of separation. Attempting to remove separated instruments should be carefully evaluated.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this in vivo study was to assess the accuracy of 2 third-generation electronic apex locators (EALs), Propex II (Dentsply Maillefer) and Root ZX II (J. Morita), and radiographic technique for locating the major foramen (MF). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-two premolars with single canals that required extraction were included. Following anesthesia, access, and initial canal preparation with size 10 and 15 K-flex files and SX and S1 rotary ProTaper files, the canals were irrigated with 2.5% sodium hypochlorite. The length of the root canal was verified 3 times for each tooth using the 2 apex locators and once using the radiographic technique. Teeth were extracted and the actual WL was determined using size 15 K-files under a × 25 magnification. The Biostat 4.0 program (AnalystSoft Inc.) was used for comparing the direct measurements with those obtained using radiographic technique and the apex locators. Pearson's correlation analysis and analysis of variance (ANOVA) were used for statistical analyses. RESULTS: The measurements obtained using the visual method exhibited the strongest correlation with Root ZX II (r = 0.94), followed by Propex II (r = 0.90) and Ingle's technique (r = 0.81; p < 0.001). Descriptive statistics using ANOVA (Tukey's post hoc test) revealed significant differences between the radiographic measurements and both EALs measurements (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Both EALs presented similar accuracy that was higher than that of the radiographic measurements obtained with Ingle's technique. Our results suggest that the use of these EALs for MF location is more accurate than the use of radiographic measurements.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: This study evaluates the efficacy of passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI) in removing root canal filling material from endodontically treated teeth after using one of two reciprocating systems, Reciproc (VDW, Munich, Germany) or WaveOne (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland), or one nickel-titanium (NiTi) rotary system, ProTaper Universal Retreatment (Dentsply Maillefer). METHODS: One hundred and twenty straight root canals of extracted human maxillary incisors were instrumented and then obturated. The specimens were divided into six groups (n=20) as follows: Group R, Reciproc R25 instrument without PUI; Group W, WaveOne Primary instrument without PUI; Group PT, ProTaper Universal Retreatment system without PUI; Group R-PUI, Reciproc R25 with PUI; Group W-PUI, WaveOne Primary with PUI and Group PT-PUI, ProTaper Universal Retreatment system with PUI. After removing the filling material, the teeth were cleaved longitudinally and photographed. The total canal space and remaining material were quantified with the aid of an imaging software tool. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to identify significant differences between the groups. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences (P>0.05) in residual filling material were observed between the groups. CONCLUSION: The use of PUI did not improve the removal of filling material from the root canals, regardless of the previously used instrumentation system.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: The maximum removal of root canal filling material is essential for successful endodontic retreatment. The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy of 2 reciprocating systems (Reciproc [VDW, Munich, Germany] and WaveOne [Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland]) compared with a nickel-titanium (NiTi) rotary system (ProTaper Universal Retreatment [Dentsply Maillefer]) in the removal of root canal filling material. METHODS: Sixty root canals of extracted human maxillary incisors were prepared using the NiTi ProTaper rotary system with the complementary use of a #40 K-type file and then obturated. The specimens were divided into 3 groups (n = 20) according to the system used for filling removal: group 1: instrument R25 of the Reciproc system, group 2: primary instrument of the WaveOne system, and group 3: NiTi rotary instruments of the ProTaper Universal Retreatment system. The teeth were cleaved longitudinally and photographed under a dental operating microscope with 5 × magnification. Images were transferred to a computer, and residual filling material was quantified using Image Tool software (University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio, TX). Results were compared using 1-way analysis of variance (P < .05). RESULTS: All teeth examined had filling remnants within the canal. No statistically significant difference (P > .05) in residual filling material was observed among the groups, with 4.30% in group 1, 2.98% in group 2, and 3.14% in group 3. CONCLUSIONS: The Reciproc and WaveOne reciprocating systems were as effective as the ProTaper Universal retreatment system for gutta-percha and sealer removal.