Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · European Journal of General Dentistry 2017; 6(01): 42-47
DOI: 10.4103/2278-9626.198611
Original Article

Comparative evaluation of different obturation techniques in primary molars: An in vivo study

Monika Khubchandani
Department of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, Sharad Pawar Dental College and Hospital, Wardha, Maharashtra, India
,
M. Sudhindra Baliga
Department of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, Sharad Pawar Dental College and Hospital, Wardha, Maharashtra, India
,
Sudhir S. Rawlani
1   Department of Oral Medicine Diagnosis and Radiology, Sharad Pawar Dental College and Hospital, Wardha, Maharashtra, India
,
Shivlal M. Rawlani
2   Department of Public Health Dentistry, VSPM Dental College and Hospital, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India
,
Khushboo M. Khubchandani
3   Department of Pediatrics, Government Medical College, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India
,
Nilima Thosar
Department of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, Sharad Pawar Dental College and Hospital, Wardha, Maharashtra, India
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
  PDF Download Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Aim: The study was undertaken to compare the filling quality of a 30 gauge cannula (NaviTip™, Ultradent Inc., South Jordan, UT, USA) used on a pressure syringe with a lentulospiral in primary molars. Materials and Methods: Thirty mandibular first and second primary molars in 28 healthy children of both sexes in the age group of 4-8 years were included in the study. All pulpectomy procedures were performed by one investigator. Before obturation, the subjects were randomly selected for the two obturation techniques. Effectiveness of the two obturation techniques was assessed by three independent evaluators using postoperative radiographs taken immediately after each obturation. Filling quality was determined by analyzing presence or absence of voids, extent of fill and apical seal. Results: The results of the obturation quality of the tested techniques were collected and statistically analyzed using chi-square test. There was a significant difference for the presence of voids between the two groups. NaviTip group showed the best results for the number of voids (mesial χ2 = 3.567, P = 0.0497) (distal χ2 = 5.058, P = 0.0269). The lentulospiral group showed more number of optimal fillings. When results were compared in terms of apical seal, NaviTip showed better apical seal but statistically no difference (P >.05). Conclusion: Lentulospiral produced the best results in terms of length of obturation, while NaviTip syringe was efficient enough in controlling voids and produced the best results for apical seal.

Keywords

Obturation techniques - primary teeth - pulpectomy


Publication History

Article published online:
01 November 2021

© 2017. European Journal of General Dentistry. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Trairatvorakul C, Chunlasikaiwan S. Success of pulpectomy with zinc oxide-eugenol vs calcium hydroxide/iodoform paste in primary molars: A clinical study. Pediatr Dent 2008;30:303-8.
  • 2 da Costa CC, Kunert GG, da Costa Filho LC, Kunert IR. Endodontics in primary molars using ultrasonic instrumentation. J Dent Child (Chic) 2008;75:20-3.
  • 3 Bhandari SK, Anita, Prajapati U. Root canal obturation of primary teeth: Disposable injection technique. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2012;30:13-8.
  • 4 Guelmann M, McEachern M, Turner C. Pulpectomies in primary incisors using three delivery systems: An in vitro study. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2004;28:323-6.
  • 5 Subba Reddy VV, Shakunthala B. Comparative assessment of three obturation techniques in primary molars - An in-vivo study. Endodontology 1997;9:13-6.
  • 6 Aylard SR, Johnson R. Assessment of filling techniques for primary teeth. Pediatr Dent 1987;9:195-8.
  • 7 O′Riordan MW, Coll J. Pulpectomy procedure for deciduous teeth with severe pulpal necrosis. J Am Dent Assoc 1979;99:480-2.
  • 8 Guideline on Pulp Therapy for Primary and Immature Permanent Teeth. Reference Manual 2016;37:244-52.
  • 9 Ozalp N, Saroglu I, Sönmez H. Evaluation of various root canal filling materials in primary molar pulpectomies: An in vivo study. Am J Dent 2005;18:347-50.
  • 10 Gupta S, Das G. Clinical and radiographic evaluation of zinc oxide eugenol and metapex in root canal treatment of primary teeth. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2011;29:222-8.
  • 11 Bawazir OA, Salama FS. Clinical evaluation of root canal obturation methods in primary teeth. Pediatr Dent 2006;28:39-47.
  • 12 Dandashi MB, Nazif MM, Zullo T, Elliott MA, Schneider LG, Czonstkowsky M. An in vitro comparison of three endodontic techniques for primary incisors. Pediatr Dent 1993;15:254-6.
  • 13 Sari S, Okte Z. Success rate of Sealapex in root canal treatment for primary teeth: 3-year follow-up. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2008;105:e93-6.
  • 14 Dultra F, Barroso JM, Carrasco LD, Capelli A, Guerisoli DM, Pécora JD. Evaluation of apical microleakage of teeth sealed with four different root canal sealers. J Appl Oral Sci 2006;14:341-5.
  • 15 Aghdasi MM, Asnaashari M, Aliari A, Fahimipour F, Soheilifar S. Conventional versus digital radiographs in detecting artificial voids in root canal filling material. Iran Endod J 2011;6:99-102.
  • 16 Kositbowornchai S, Hanwachirapong D, Somsopon R, Pirmsinthavee S, Sooksuntisakoonchai N. Ex vivo comparison of digital images with conventional radiographs for detection of simulated voids in root canal filling material. Int Endod J 2006;39:287-92.
  • 17 Bodanezi A, Munhoz Ede A, Bernardineli N, Capelozza AL, de Moraes IG, Bramante CM. Radiographic analysis of root canal fillings: Influence of two sealers on the perception of voids. Braz Dent J 2010;21:142-7.
  • 18 Kahn FH, Rosenberg PA, Schertzer L, Korthals G, Nguyen PN. An in-vitro evaluation of sealer placement methods. Int Endod J 1997;30:181-6.
  • 19 Torres CP, Apicella MJ, Yancich PP, Parker MH. Intracanal placement of calcium hydroxide: A comparison of techniques, revisited. J Endod 2004;30:225-7.
  • 20 Serene TP, Vesely J, Boackle RJ. Complement activation as a possible in vitro indication of the inflammatory potential of endodontic materials. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1988;65:354-7.
  • 21 de Faria-Júnior NB, Massi S, Croti HR, Gutierrez JC, Dametto FR, Vaz LG. Comparative assessment of the flow rate of root canal sealers. Rev Odontol Ciênc 2010;25:170-3.
  • 22 Camps J, Pommel L, Bukiet F, About I. Influence of the powder/liquid ratio on the properties of zinc oxide-eugenol-based root canal sealers. Dent Mater 2004;20:915-23.