J Korean Acad Conserv Dent.  2005 Mar;30(2):79-85. 10.5395/JKACD.2005.30.2.079.

Obturation efficiency of non-standardized gutta-percha cone in curved root canals prepared with 0.06 taper nickel-titanium instruments

• Lee EA
• Kim SK

• KMID: 1986999
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2005.30.2.079

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the obturation efficiency of a non-standardized gutta-percha cone in curved root canals prepared with 0.06 taper nickel-titanium instruments. Sixty simulated curved root canals in clear resin blocks were prepared with crown-down technique using 0.06 taper rotary ProTaper(TM) and ProFile (Dentsply-Maillefer) until apical canal was size 30. Root canals were randomly divided into 4 groups of 15 blocks and obturated with cold-laterally compacted gutta-percha technique by using either a non-standardized size medium gutta-percha cone or an ISO-standardized size 30 one as a master cone. Gutta-percha area ratio were calculated at apical levels of 1, 3, and 5 mm using AutoCAD 2000 after cross-sectioning, and the data were analyzed with one-way and two-way ANOVAs and Duncan's multiple range test. Non-standardized size medium cone groups showed significantly higher gutta-percha area ratio than standardized cone groups at all apical levels (p < 0.01). Non-standardized cone groups used significantly less accessory cones than standardized cone groups (p < 0.01).

Keyword

Lateral compaction; Gutta-percha cone; Non-standardized cone; Root canal obturation; Gutta-percha area ratio

MeSH Terms

Dental Pulp Cavity*
Gutta-Percha*
Root Canal Obturation
Gutta-Percha

Figure

• 

  Figure 1 Computer captured cross-sectional images of filled canal at apical 1, 3, and 5 mm levels in each group. St : standardized cone using group, Non-St : non-standardized cone using group, SS : stainless-steel spreader using group, NT : nickel-titanium spreader using group.

• 

  Figure 2 The ratio of gutta-percha area (%) with different master gutta-percha cones and canal spreaders (mean ± S.D.). *Significantly different (p < 0.01). St : standardized cone using group, Non-St : non-standardized cone using group, SS : stainless-steel spreader using group, NT : nickel-titanium spreader using group.

• 

  Figure 3 Number of accessory gutta-percha cones used for the canal filling (mean ± S.D.). *Non-standardized cone groups used significantly less accessory cones than standardized cone groups (p < 0.01). St : standardized cone using group, Non-St : non-standardized cone using group, SS : stainless-steel spreader using group, NT : nickel-titanium spreader using group.

Reference

1. Gutmann JL, Witherspoon DE. Cohen S, Burns RC, editors. Obturation of the root canal system. Pathways of the pulp. 1998. 7th ed. St. Louis: CV Mosby Co;258–264.

2. Abou-Rass M, Frank AL, Glick DH. The anticurvature filing method to prepared the curved root canal. J Am Dent Assoc. 1980. 101:792–794.

3. Goerig AC, Michelich RJ, Schulta H. Instrumentation of root canals in molar using step-down technique. J Endod. 1982. 8:550–554.

4. Morgan LF, Montgomery S. An evaluation for the crown-down pressureless technique. J Endod. 1984. 10:491–498.

5. Roane JB, Sabala CL, Duncanson MG. The "balanced force" concept for the instrumentation of curved canals. J Endod. 1985. 11:203–211.

6. American Dental Association Council on Dental Materials, Instruments and Equipment. Revised ANSI/ADA specification no. 28 for root canal files and reamers, type-K, and no. Chicago. 2002. J Am Dent Assoc Press;Cited from Ingle JI, Beveridge EE: Endodontics, Lea & Febiger, Philadelphia, 2nd ed., p173-176, 1976.

7. Fazekas A. Root canal preparation for obturation using nickel-titanium mechanical device. Fogorv Sz. 1998. 91:241–248.

8. Bal AS, Hicks ML, Barnett F. Comparison of laterally condensed .06 and .02 tapered Gutta-Percha and sealer in vitro. J Endod. 2001. 27:786–788.

9. Spangberg LSW. Cohen S, Burns RC, editors. Instruments, materials, and devices. Pathways of the pulp. 1998. 7th ed. St. Louis: CV Mosby Co;476–531.

10. Kwon OS, Kim SK. Apical fitness of non-standardized gutta-percha cones in simulated root canals prepared with rotary root canal instruments. J Korean Acad Conserv Dent. 2000. 25:390–398.

11. Schilder H. Filling root canals in three dimensions. Dent Clin North Am. 1967. 723–744.

12. Higgenbotham TL. A comparative study of the physical properties of five commonly used root canal sealers. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1967. 24:89–101.

13. Langeland K. Root canal sealants and pastes. Dent Clin North Am. 1974. 18:309–327.

14. Ingle JI, Newton CW, West JD, Gutmann JL, Glickman GN, Korzon BH, Martin H. Ingle JL, Bakland LK, editors. Obturation of the radicular space. Endodontics. 2002. 5th ed. Hamilton: BC Decker Inc.;571–668.

15. Glossen CR, Haller RH, Dove SB, del RIO CE. A comparison of root canal preparations using Ni-Ti engine-driven, and K-flex endodontic instruments. J Endod. 1995. 21:146–151.

16. Hovland EH, Dumsha TC. Leakage evaluation in vitro of the root canal sealer cement Sealapex. Int Endod J. 1985. 18:179–182.

17. Eguchi DS, Peters DD, Hollinger JO, Lorton L. A comparison of the area of the canal space occupied by gutta-percha following four gutta-percha obturation techniques using Procosol sealer. J Endod. 1985. 11:166–175.