Skip to content
2000
Volume 2, Issue 1
  • ISSN: 2542-579X
  • E-ISSN: 2542-5803

Abstract

To compare the success rate of different obturation procedures in primary mandibular second molars clinically and also by digital radiovisiography.

A total of 40 children aged between 4-8 years with deeply carious mandibular second primary molars indicated for single session pulpectomy were selected. Canals were obturated with Metapex. The 3 study groups (Endodontic plugger, Handheld lentulospiral, Navi Tip syringe) were compared with the control group (reamer) both clinically and radiovisiographically. The data collected were statistically analyzed using Pearson’s Chi-square and Fisher’s exact test.

The use of Navi tip syringe led to the least number of voids followed by Endodontic plugger and Reamer and the highest number of voids was reported with Lentulospiral. Navitip presented maximum number of optimally filled cases followed by Endodontic plugger and Lentulospiral and least number of optimally filled cases with reamer. However, there was no statistically significant difference (p>0.05) in any of the groups with clinical (pain and tenderness to percussion) and radiographic parameters (presence or absence of voids and length of obturation).

Within the limitations of the present study, though the clinical outcome was statistically insignificant, Navitip syringe exhibited encouraging results and is a promising option for obturation in primary teeth.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/cdent/10.2174/2542579X02999200503032916
2020-05-03
2025-02-19
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. HobsonP. Pulp treatment of deciduous teeth. 1. Factors affecting diagnosis and treatment.Br. Dent. J.1970128232238
    [Google Scholar]
  2. BerkH. KrakowA.A. A comparison of the management of pulpal pathosis in deciduous and permanent teeth.Oral Surg. Oral Med. Oral Pathol.19723494495510.1016/0030‑4220(72)90232‑0
    [Google Scholar]
  3. AllenK.R. Endodontic treatment of primary teeth.Aust. Dent. J.197924534735110.1111/j.1834‑7819.1979.tb05807.x 294240
    [Google Scholar]
  4. CollJ.A. SadrianR. Predicting pulpectomy success and its relationship to exfoliation and succedaneous dentition.Pediatr. Dent.19961815763 8668572
    [Google Scholar]
  5. MilledgeJ.T. Endodontic therapy for primary teeth. Ingle’s Endodontics.6th edHamiltonBC Decker Inc.200814001430
    [Google Scholar]
  6. JohnsonM.S. BrittoL.R. GuelmannM. Impact of a biological barrier in pulpectomies of primary molars.Pediatr. Dent.2006286506510 17249431
    [Google Scholar]
  7. PayneR.G. KennyD.J. JohnstonD.H. JuddP.L. Two-year outcome study of zinc oxide-eugenol root canal treatment for vital primary teeth.J. Can. Dent. Assoc.1993596528530, 533-536 8513418
    [Google Scholar]
  8. SadrianR. CollJ.A. A long-term followup on the retention rate of zinc oxide eugenol filler after primary tooth pulpectomy.Pediatr. Dent.1993154249253 8247898
    [Google Scholar]
  9. HanyM. Pulpectomy procedure in primary molar teeth.Eur. J. Gen. Dent.20143131010.4103/2278‑9626.126201
    [Google Scholar]
  10. OunsiH.F. DebayboD. SalamehZ. ChebaroA. BassamH. Endodontic considerations in pediatric dentistry: A clinical perspective.Int Dent South Afr2009114050
    [Google Scholar]
  11. PraveenP. AnanthrajA. KarthikV. PrathibaR. SudhirR. JayaA. A review of obturating materials for primary teeth.Streamdent201124244
    [Google Scholar]
  12. StallaertK.M. A retrospective study of root canal therapy in non vital primary molars. Toronto: University of Toronto; 2011. How to cite this article: Aly Ahmed HM. Pulpectomy procedures in primary molar teeth.Eur. J. Gen. Dent.20143310
    [Google Scholar]
  13. ChenJ. JordenM. Materials for primary tooth pulp treatment: The present and the future.Endod. Topics201223414910.1111/j.1601‑1546.2012.00289.x
    [Google Scholar]
  14. RoddH.D. WaterhouseP.J. FuksA.B. FayleS.A. MoffatM.A. British society of paediatric dentistry. Pulp therapy for primary molars.Int. J. Paediatr. Dent.200616Suppl. 1152310.1111/j.1365‑263X.2006.00774.x 16939452
    [Google Scholar]
  15. PramilaR. MuthuM.S. DeepaG. FarzanJ.M. RodriguesS.J. Pulpectomies in primary mandibular molars: a comparison of outcomes using three root filling materials.Int. Endod. J.201649541342110.1111/iej.12478 26059708
    [Google Scholar]
  16. MoskovitzM. SammaraE. HolanG. Success rate of root canal treatment in primary molars.J. Dent.2005331414710.1016/j.jdent.2004.07.009 15652167
    [Google Scholar]
  17. OzalpN. SaroğluI. SönmezH. Evaluation of various root canal filling materials in primary molar pulpectomies: an in vivo study.Am. J. Dent.2005186347350 16433405
    [Google Scholar]
  18. GuptaS. DasG. Clinical and radiographic evaluation of zinc oxide eugenol and metapex in root canal treatment of primary teeth.J. Indian Soc. Pedod. Prev. Dent.201129322222810.4103/0970‑4388.85829 21985878
    [Google Scholar]
  19. EstrelaC. Mamede NetoI. LopesH.P. EstrelaC.R. PécoraJ.D. Root canal filling with calcium hydroxide using different techniques.Braz. Dent. J.20021315356 11870964
    [Google Scholar]
  20. TakushigeT. CruzE.V. Asgor MoralA. HoshinoE. Endodontic treatment of primary teeth using a combination of antibacterial drugs.Int. Endod. J.200437213213810.1111/j.0143‑2885.2004.00771.x 14871180
    [Google Scholar]
  21. SariS. OkteZ. Success rate of Sealapex in root canal treatment for primary teeth: 3-year follow-up.Oral Surg. Oral Med. Oral Pathol. Oral Radiol. Endod.20081054e93e9610.1016/j.tripleo.2007.12.014 18329574
    [Google Scholar]
  22. BarcelosR. SantosM.P. PrimoL.G. LuizR.R. MaiaL.C. ZOE paste pulpectomies outcome in primary teeth: a systematic review.J. Clin. Pediatr. Dent.201135324124810.17796/jcpd.35.3.y777187463255n34 21678664
    [Google Scholar]
  23. SubramaniamP. GilhotraK. Endoflas, zinc oxide eugenol and metapex as root canal filling materials in primary molars--a comparative clinical study.J. Clin. Pediatr. Dent.201135436536910.17796/jcpd.35.4.1377v06621143233 22046693
    [Google Scholar]
  24. LimaC.C.B. Conde JúniorA.M. RizzoM.S. Biocompatibility of root filling pastes used in primary teeth.Int. Endod. J.201548540541610.1111/iej.12328 24889680
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Pozos-GuillenA. Garcia-FloresA. Esparza-VillalpandoV. Garrocho-RangelA. Intracanal irrigants for pulpectomy in primary teeth: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Int. J. Paediatr. Dent.201626641242510.1111/ipd.12228 26898157
    [Google Scholar]
  26. NadkarniU. DamleS.G. Comparative evaluation of calcium hydroxide and zinc oxide eugenol as root canal filling materials for primary molars: a clinical and radiographic study.J. Indian Soc. Pedod. Prev. Dent.2000181110 11323998
    [Google Scholar]
  27. TrairatvorakulC. ChunlasikaiwanS. Success of pulpectomy with zinc oxide eugenol vs calcium hydroxide/iodoform paste in primary molars: A clinical study.Pediatr. Dent.200830303308
    [Google Scholar]
  28. MortazaviM. MesbahiM. Comparison of zinc oxide and eugenol, and Vitapex for root canal treatment of necrotic primary teeth.Int. J. Paediatr. Dent.200414641742410.1111/j.1365‑263X.2004.00544.x 15525310
    [Google Scholar]
  29. BallesioI. CampanellaV. GallusiG. MarzoG. Chemical and pharmacological shaping of necrotic primary teeth.Eur. J. Paediatr. Dent.200233133140 12871002
    [Google Scholar]
  30. NakornchaiS. BanditsingP. VisetratanaN. Clinical evaluation of 3Mix and Vitapex as treatment options for pulpally involved primary molars.Int. J. Paediatr. Dent.201020321422110.1111/j.1365‑263X.2010.01044.x 20409203
    [Google Scholar]
  31. ItoI.Y. JuniorF.M. Paula-SilvaF.W. Da SilvaL.A. LeonardoM.R. Nelson-Filho. Microbial culture and checkerboard DNA-DNA hybridization assessment of bacteria in root canals of primary teeth pre- and post-endodontic therapy with a calcium hydroxide/chlorhexidine paste.Int. J. Paediatr. Dent.201121353
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Barja-FidalgoF. Moutinho-RibeiroM. OliveiraM.A. de OliveiraB.H. A systematic review of root canal filling materials for deciduous teeth: is there an alternative for zinc oxide-eugenol?ISRN Dent.2011201136731810.5402/2011/367318 21991471
    [Google Scholar]
  33. NurkoC. Garcia GodoyF. Evaluation of a calcium hydroxide/iodoform paste (Vitapex) in root canal therapy for primary teeth.J. Clin. Pediatr. Dent.199923289294
    [Google Scholar]
  34. ManiSA ChawlaHS TewariA GoyalA Mani SA, Chawla HS, Tewari A, Goyal A. Evaluation of calcium hydroxide and zinc oxide eugenol as root canal filling materials in primary teethASDC J Dent Child 2000; 67(2): 142-147, 83.10826052
    [Google Scholar]
  35. NurkoC. RanlyD.M. García-GodoyF. LakshmyyaK.N. Resorption of a calcium hydroxide/iodoform paste (Vitapex) in root canal therapy for primary teeth: A case report.Pediatr. Dent.2000226517520 11132515
    [Google Scholar]
  36. FariaG. Nelson-FilhoP. FreitasA.C. AssedS. ItoI.Y. Antibacterial effect of root canal preparation and calcium hydroxide paste (Calen) intracanal dressing in primary teeth with apical periodontitis.J. Appl. Oral Sci.200513435135510.1590/S1678‑77572005000400007 20865218
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Amorim LdeF. ToledoO.A. EstrelaC.R. Decurcio DdeA. EstrelaC. Antimicrobial analysis of different root canal filling pastes used in pediatric dentistry by two experimental methods.Braz. Dent. J.200617431732210.1590/S0103‑64402006000400010 17262146
    [Google Scholar]
  38. ReddyS. RamakrishnaY. Evaluation of antimicrobial efficacy of various root canal filling materials used in primary teeth: a microbiological study.J. Clin. Pediatr. Dent.200731319319810.17796/jcpd.31.3.t73r4061424j2578 17550046
    [Google Scholar]
  39. PetelR. MoskovitzM. TickotskyN. HalabiA. GoldsteinJ. Houri-HaddadY. Cytotoxicity and proliferative effects of Iodoform-containing root canal-filling material on RAW 264.7 macrophage and RKO epithelial cell lines.Arch. Oral Biol.2013581758110.1016/j.archoralbio.2012.06.014 23123069
    [Google Scholar]
  40. TorresC.P. ApicellaM.J. YancichP.P. ParkerM.H. Intracanal placement of calcium hydroxide: a comparison of techniques, revisited.J. Endod.200430422522710.1097/00004770‑200404000‑00010 15085051
    [Google Scholar]
  41. SigurdssonA. StancillR. MadisonS. Intracanal placement of Ca(OH)2: a comparison of techniques.J. Endod.199218836737010.1016/S0099‑2399(06)81220‑3 1431690
    [Google Scholar]
  42. CerqueiraD.F. Mello MouraA.C. SantosE.M. Guedes PintoA.C. Cytotoxicity, histopathological, microbiological and clinical aspects of an endodontic iodoform based paste used in pediatric dentistry: A review.J. Clin. Pediatr. Dent.200832105110
    [Google Scholar]
  43. TrairatvorakulC. DetsomboonratP. Success rates of a mixture of ciprofloxacin, metronidazole, and minocycline antibiotics used in the non-instrumentation endodontic treatment of mandibular primary molars with carious pulpal involvement.Int. J. Paediatr. Dent.201222321722710.1111/j.1365‑263X.2011.01181.x 21951271
    [Google Scholar]
  44. BarrE.S. FlatizC.M. HicksM.J. A retrospective radiographic evaluation of primary molar pulpectomies.Pediatr. Dent.199113149 1945984
    [Google Scholar]
  45. LinB. ZhaoY. YangJ. WangW. GeL.H. Effects of zinc oxide-eugenol and calcium hydroxide/iodoform on delaying root resorption in primary molars without successors.Dent. Mater. J.201433447147510.4012/dmj.2014‑036 25017021
    [Google Scholar]
  46. FieldJ.W. GutmannJ.L. SolomonE.S. RakusinH. A clinical radiographic retrospective assessment of the success rate of single-visit root canal treatment.Int. Endod. J.2004371708210.1111/j.1365‑2591.2004.00765.x 14870762
    [Google Scholar]
  47. DograS. Comparative evaluation of calcium hydroxide and zinc oxide eugenol as root canal filling materials for primary molars: A clinical and radiographic study.World J Dent2011223123610.5005/jp‑journals‑10015‑1088
    [Google Scholar]
  48. RamarK. MungaraJ. Clinical and radiographic evaluation of pulpectomies using three root canal filling materials: an in-vivo study.J. Indian Soc. Pedod. Prev. Dent.2010281252910.4103/0970‑4388.60481 20215668
    [Google Scholar]
  49. GuelmannM. McEachernM. TurnerC. Pulpectomies in primary incisors using three delivery systems: an in vitro study.J. Clin. Pediatr. Dent.200428432332610.17796/jcpd.28.4.j634167443m061n3 15366621
    [Google Scholar]
  50. DandashiM.B. NazifM.M. ZulloT. ElliottM.A. SchneiderL.G. CzonstkowskyM. An in vitro comparison of three endodontic techniques for primary incisors.Pediatr. Dent.1993154254256 8247899
    [Google Scholar]
  51. ReddyV.V.S. ShakunthalaB. Comparative assessment of three obturating techniques in primary molars: An in vitro study.J. Endod.199791316
    [Google Scholar]
  52. KahnF.H. RosenbergP.A. SchertzerL. KorthalsG. NguyenP.N. An in-vitro evaluation of sealer placement methods.Int. Endod. J.199730318118610.1111/j.1365‑2591.1997.tb00694.x 9477802
    [Google Scholar]
  53. MadanN. RathnamA. ShigliA.L. IndushekarK.R. K-file vs Pro files in cleaning capacity and instrumentation time in primary molar root canals: an in vitro study.J. Indian Soc. Pedod. Prev. Dent.201129126
    [Google Scholar]
  54. AsokanS. SooriaprakasC. RaghuV. BairaviR. Volumetric analysis of root canal fillings in primary teeth using spiral computed tomography: an in vitro study.J. Dent. Child. (Chic.)20127924648 22828756
    [Google Scholar]
  55. SmutkeereeA. PhajongviriyatornP. KomoltriC. JantaratJ. Calcium hydroxide medication in primary molars using different preparations and placement techniques: an in vitro study.Eur. Arch. Paediatr. Dent.201516431331810.1007/s40368‑014‑0163‑7 25573787
    [Google Scholar]
  56. AylardS.R. JohnsonR. Assessment of filling techniques for primary teeth.Pediatr. Dent.198793195198 3507634
    [Google Scholar]
  57. ChawlaH.S. SetiaS. GuptaN. GaubaK. GoyalA. Evaluation of a mixture of zinc oxide, calcium hydroxide, and sodium fluoride as a new root canal filling material for primary teeth.J. Indian Soc. Pedod. Prev. Dent.2008262535810.4103/0970‑4388.41616 18603728
    [Google Scholar]
  58. MoskovitzM. YahavD. TickotskyN. HolanG. Long term follow up of root canal treated primary molars.Int. J. Paediatr. Dent.20102020721310.1111/j.1365‑263X.2010.01038.x
    [Google Scholar]
  59. SilvaL.A. LeonardoM.R. Nelson-FilhoP. TanomaruJ.M. TanomaruJ.M. Comparison of rotary and manual instrumentation techniques on cleaning capacity and instrumentation time in deciduous molars.J. Dent. Child. (Chic.)20047114547 15272656
    [Google Scholar]
  60. GomesG.B. BonowM.L.M. CarlottoD. JacintoR.D.C. In vivo Comparison of the Duration between two Endodontic Instrumentation Techniques in Deciduous Teeth.Brazilian Res Ped Dent Integ Clin201414319920510.4034/PBOCI.2014.143.04
    [Google Scholar]
  61. BawazirO.A. SalamaF.S. Clinical evaluation of root canal obturation methods in primary teeth.Pediatr. Dent.20062813947 16615374
    [Google Scholar]
  62. WangY.L. ChangH.H. HunagG.F. LinC.P. LiU.M. GuoM.K. Application of Ni-Ti rotary files for pulpectomy in primary molars.J. Dent. Sci.2006111015
    [Google Scholar]
  63. CanogluH. TekcicekM.U. CehreliZ.C. Comparison of conventional, rotary, and ultrasonic preparation, different final irrigation regimens, and 2 sealers in primary molar root canal therapy.Pediatr. Dent.200628518523
    [Google Scholar]
  64. MemarpourM. ShahidiS. MeshkiR. Comparison of different obturation techniques for primary molars by digital radiography.Pediatr. Dent.2013353236240 23756307
    [Google Scholar]
  65. UgurI. HikmetA. TamerT. Leakage evaluation of three different root canal obturation techniques using electrochemical evaluation and dye penetration evaluation methods.Aust Endod2007331822
    [Google Scholar]
  66. FuksA.B. EidelmanE. PaukerN. Root fillings with Endoflas in primary teeth: a retrospective study.J. Clin. Pediatr. Dent.2002271414510.17796/jcpd.27.1.pp237453707386m1 12413171
    [Google Scholar]
  67. AzarM.R. SafiL. NikaeinA. Comparison of the cleaning capacity of Mtwo and Pro Taper rotary systems and manual instruments in primary teeth.Dent Res J (Isfahan)20129214615110.4103/1735‑3327.95227 22623929
    [Google Scholar]
  68. de SousaD.L. de SousaR.B. PintoD.N. NetoJ.J. de CarvalhoC.B. de AlmeidaP.C. Antibacterial effects of chemomechanical instrumentation and calcium hydroxide in primary teeth with pulp necrosis.Pediatr. Dent.2011334307311 21902996
    [Google Scholar]
  69. GroverR. MehraM. PanditI.K. SrivastavaN. GugnaniN. GuptaM. Clinical efficacy of various root canal obturating methods in primary teeth: a comparative study.Eur. J. Paediatr. Dent.2013142104108 23758458
    [Google Scholar]
  70. AhmedH.M. Anatomical challenges, electronic working length determination and current developments in root canal preparation of primary molar teeth.Int. Endod. J.201346111011102210.1111/iej.12134 23711096
    [Google Scholar]
  71. ChenX-X. LinB-C. ZhongJ. GeL-H. . [Degradation evaluation and success of pulpectomy with a modified primary root canal filling in primary molars].Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao2015473529535 26080888
    [Google Scholar]
  72. SinghR. ChaudharyS. ManujaN. ChaitraT.R. SinhaA.A. Evaluation of different root canal obturation methods in primary teeth using cone beam computerized tomography.J. Clin. Pediatr. Dent.201539546246910.17796/1053‑4628‑39.5.462 26551371
    [Google Scholar]
  73. VashistaK. SandhuM. SachdevV. Comparative evaluation of obturating techniques in primary teeth: an in vivo study.Int. J. Clin. Pediatr. Dent.20158317618010.5005/jp‑journals‑10005‑1309 26628851
    [Google Scholar]
  74. NeelakandanP. SharmaS. Pain after single visit root canal treatment with two singles file systems based on different kinematics: A prospective randomized multicentre clinical study.Clin. Oral Investig.2015192211221710.1007/s00784‑015‑1448‑x
    [Google Scholar]
  75. GovindarajuL. JeevanandanG. SubramanianE.M.G. Clinical evaluation of quality of obturation and instrumentation time using two modified rotary file systems with manual instrumentation in primary teeth.J. Clin. Diagn. Res.201711ZC55ZC58
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/cdent/10.2174/2542579X02999200503032916
Loading
/content/journals/cdent/10.2174/2542579X02999200503032916
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error
Please enter a valid_number test