Apical prepration size in infected root canals
Article information
Restor Dent Endod. 2010;35(1):1-4
Publication date (electronic) : 2010 January 31
doi :
https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2010.35.1.001
Received 2010 January 21; Revised 2010 January 22; Accepted 2010 January 22.
Abstract
The final preparation (MAF) size in infected root canals is still controversial. Nonetheless, recent studies demonstrated that larger apical preparation sizes produces a greater reduction in remaining bacteria and dentinal debris as compared to smaller apical preparation sizes. Therefore, clinicians should be practiced with treatment strategies guided by evidence-based information, especially in infected/failed root canals.
References
1. Kakehashi S, Stanley HR, Fitzgerald RJ. The effects of surgical exposure of dental pulps in germ-free and conventional laboratory rats. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1965. 20340–349.
2. Sundqvist G. Bacteriological studies of necrotic dental pulps 1976. Umeå University Odontological Dissertations No.7.
3. Figdor D. Microbial etiology of endodontic treatment failure and pathologic properties of selected species 2002. Umeå University Odontological Dissertations No.79.
4. Bystrom A, Sundqvist G. Bacteriological evaluation of the efficacy of mechanical instrumentation in endodontic therapy. Scand J Dent Res 1981. 89321–328.
5. Falk KW, Sedgley CM. The influence of preparation size on the mechanical efficacy of root canal irrigation in vitro. J Endod 2005. 31742–745.
6. Jung IY, Seo MA, Fouad AF, Spangberg LSW, Lee SJ, Kum KY. Apical anatomy of mesiobuccal and mesial root of permanent first molars. J Endod 2005. 31364–368.
7. Dummer PMH, McGinn JH, Rees DG. The position and topography of the apical canal constriction and apical foramen. Int Endod J 1984. 17192–198.
8. Peters OA, Schönenberger K, Laib A. Effects of four Ni-Ti preparation techniques on root canal geometry assessed by micro computed tomography. Int Endod J 2001. 34221–230.
9. Baugh D, Wallace J. The role of apical instrumentation in root canal treatment: A review of the literature. J Endod 2005. 31333–340.
10. Rollison S, Barnett F, Stevens R. Efficacy of bacterial removal from instrumented root canals in vitro related to instrumentation technique and size. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2002. 94366–371.
11. Grossman LI. Endodontic practice 1970. 7th edth ed. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger;
12. Barroso JM, Guerisoli DMZ, Capelli A, Saquy PC, Pěcora JM. Influence of cervical preflaring on determination of apical file size in maxillary premolars: SEM analysis. Braz Dent J 2005. 1630–34.
13. Silveira LFM, Martos J, Pintado LS, Teixeeira RA, Neto JBC. Early preflaring and crown-down shaping influences the first file binds to the canal apical third. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2008. 106e99–e101.
14. Kfir A, Rosenberg E, Fuss Z. Comparison in vivo of the first tapered and nontapered instruments that bind at the apical constriction. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2006. 102395–398.
15. Wu MK, Wesselink PR. Efficacy of three techniques in cleaning the apical portion of the curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1995. 79492–496.
16. Shuping G, Orstavik D, Sigurdsson A, Trope M. Reduction of intracanal bacteria using nickel-titanium rotary instrumentation and various medications. J Endod 2000. 26751–755.
Article information Continued
Copyright © 2010 Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry
