Skip Navigation
Skip to contents

Restor Dent Endod : Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics

OPEN ACCESS

Search

Page Path
HOME > Search
2 "Marcos de Azevêdo Rios"
Filter
Filter
Article category
Keywords
Publication year
Authors
Research Articles
Fracture incidence of Reciproc instruments during root canal retreatment performed by postgraduate students: a cross-sectional retrospective clinical study
Liliana Machado Ruivo, Marcos de Azevedo Rios, Alexandre Mascarenhas Villela, Alexandre Sigrist de Martin, Augusto Shoji Kato, Rina Andrea Pelegrine, Ana Flávia Almeida Barbosa, Emmanuel João Nogueira Leal Silva, Carlos Eduardo da Silveira Bueno
Restor Dent Endod 2021;46(4):e49.   Published online September 9, 2021
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2021.46.e49
AbstractAbstract PDFPubReaderePub
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.

  • 29 View
  • 1 Download
  • 4 Web of Science
Close layer
In vivo assessment of accuracy of Propex II, Root ZX II, and radiographic measurements for location of the major foramen
Fernanda Garcia Tampelini, Marcelo Santos Coelho, Marcos de Azevêdo Rios, Carlos Eduardo Fontana, Daniel Guimarães Pedro Rocha, Sergio Luiz Pinheiro, Carlos Eduardo da Silveira Bueno
Restor Dent Endod 2017;42(3):200-205.   Published online May 16, 2017
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2017.42.3.200
AbstractAbstract PDFPubReaderePub
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.

  • 21 View
  • 0 Download
Close layer

Restor Dent Endod : Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics
Close layer
TOP