XP-endo Finisher: A New Solution for Smear Layer Removal

Open access

Abstract

Introduction The aim of this study was to evaluate using SEM analysis the effectiveness of a new instrument XP-endo Finisher in cleaning root canal walls after instrumentation with BioRaCe NiTi rotary instruments.

Material and Methods This in vitro study was conducted on 30 extracted single rooted teeth divided in two groups. Instrumentation of all canals was done using basic BioRaCe NiTi rotary instruments with copious irrigation of 2% NaOCl. In the first group, after complete instrumentation smear layer was removed using XP-endo Finisher, while the other group served as negative control. The roots were then after longitudinally cut and SEM analysis was performed. The presence of smear layer in the coronal, middle and apical third was assessed. The data were statistically analyzed using Mann-Whitney U-test (p<0.05).

Results The results showed that average value of smear layer on the canal walls in the XP-endo Finisher group was significantly lower than in the control group (p<0.05).

Conclusion XP-endo Finisher after canal instrumentation with NiTi rotary instruments effectively cleaned canal walls and removed smear layer.

1. Ruddle CJ. Cleaning and shaping root canal system. In: Cohen S, Burns RC, editors. Pathways of the pulp. 8th ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 2002. p.231-91.

2. Violich DR, Chandler NP. The smear layer in endodontics - a review. Int Endod J. 2010; 43(1):2-15. [DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2009.01627.x] [PMID: 20002799]

3. Živković S, Brkanić T, Dačić D, Opačić V, Pavlović V, Medojević M. Smear layer in endodontics. Stomatološki glasnik Srbije. 2005; 52(1):7-19. [DOI: 10.2298/SGS0501007Z]

4. Torabinejad M, Handysides R, Khademi AA, Bakland LK. Clinical implications of the smear layer in endodontics: a review. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2002; 94(6):658-66. [DOI: 10.1067/moe.2002.128962] [PMID: 12464887]

5. Ruddle CJ. Nickel-titanium rotary systems: review of existing instruments and geometries. Dent Today. 2000; 19(10):86-8, 90-5. [PMID: 12524811]

6. De-Deus G, Garcia-Filho P. Influence of the NiTi rotary system on the debridement quality of the root canal space. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2009; 108(4):e71-6. [DOI: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2009.05.012] [PMID: 19778736]

7. Rödig T, Hülsmann M, Kahlmeier C. Comparison of root canal preparation with two rotary NiTi instruments: ProFile .04 and GT Rotary. Int Endod J. 2007; 40(7):553-62. [DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2007.01270.x] [PMID: 17511784]

8. Cheung GS, Liu CS. A retrospective study of endodontic treatment outcome between nickel-titanium rotary and stainless steel hand filing techniques. J Endod. 2009; 35(7):938-43. [DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2009.04.016] [PMID: 19567311]

9. Peters OA. Current challenges and concepts in the preparation of root canal systems: a review. J Endod. 2004; 30(8):559-67. [DOI: 10.1097/01.DON.0000129039.59003.9D] [PMID: 15273636]

10. Silva PV, Guedes DF, Nakadi FV, Pécora JD, Cruz-Filho AM. Chitosan: a new solution for removal of smear layer after root canal instrumentation. Int Endod J. 2013; 46(4):332-8. [DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2012.02119.x] [PMID: 22970844]

11. Andrabi SM, Kumar A, Kumar Tewari R, Kumar Mishra S, Iftekhar H. An in vitro SEM study on the effectiveness of smear layer removal of four different irrigations. Iran Endod J. 2012; 7(4):171-6. [DOI: 10.7508/10.7508/iej] [PMID: 23130075]

12. Akncbay H, Senel S, Ay ZY. Application of chitosan gel in the treatment of chronic periodontitis. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2007; 80(2):290-6. [DOI: 10.1002/jbm.b.30596] [PMID: 16767723]

13. Guerisoli DM, Marchesan MA, Walmsley AD, Lumley PJ, Pecora JD. Evaluation of smear layer removal by EDTAC and sodium hypochlorite with ultrasonic agitation. Int Endod J. 2002; 35(5):418-21. [DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.2002.00488.x] [PMID: 12059911]

14. Takeda FH, Harashima T, Kimura Y, Matsumoto K. Efficacy of Er:YAG laser irradiation in removing debris and smear layer on root canal walls. J Endod. 1998; 24(8):548-51. [DOI: 10.1016/S0099-2399(98)80075-7] [PMID: 9759018]

15. Kamel WH, Kataia EM. Comparison of the efficacy of smear clear with and without a canal brush in smear layer and debris removal from instrumented root canal using WaveOne versus ProTaper: a scanning electron microscopic study. J Endod. 2014; 40(3):446-50. [DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2013.09.028] [PMID: 24565669]

16. Fróes JA, Horta HG, da Silveira AB. Smear layer influence on the apical seal of four different obturation techniques. J Endod. 2000; 26(6):351-4. [DOI: 10.1097/00004770-200006000-00010] [PMID: 11199753]

17. Dačić D, Živković S. A comparative investigation of the cleaning efficacy of different manual and mechanical endodontic instruments (SEM study). Stomatološki glasnik Srbije. 2003; 50(3):137-43. [DOI: 10.2298/SGS0303137D]

18. FKG Dentaire SA. XP-endo Finisher [brochure]. La Chaux-de-Fonds: FKG Dentaire SA. Available from: http://www.fkg.ch/sites/default/files/fkg_xp_endo_brochure_en_vb.pdf.

19. Hülsmann M, Rümmelin C, Schäfers F. Root canal cleanliness after preparation with different endodontic handpieces and hand instruments: a comparative SEM investigation. J Endod. 1997; 23(5):301-6. [DOI: 10.1016/S0099-2399(97)80410-4] [PMID: 9545932]

20. Torabinejad M, Walton RE. Endodontics: Principles and Practice. 4th ed. St. Louis: Saunders/Elsevier; 2009.

21. Poggio C, Dagna A, Chiesa M, Scribante A, Beltrami R, Colombo M. Effects of NiTi rotary and reciprocating instruments on debris and smear layer scores: an SEM evaluation. J Appl Biomater Funct Mater. 2014; 12(3):256-62. [DOI: 10.5301/jabfm.5000161] [PMID: 24425380]

22. Sharma G, Kakkar P, Vats A. A comparative SEM investigation of smear layer remaining on dentinal walls by three rotary NiTi files with different cross sectional designs in moderately curved canals. J Clin Diagn Res. 2015; 9(3):ZC43-7. [DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2015/11569.5710] [PMID: 25954704]

23. Hülsmann M, Peters OA, Dummer PMH. Mechanical preparation of root canals: shaping goals, techniques and means. Endodontic Topics. 2005; 10(1):30-76. [DOI: 10.1111/j.1601-1546.2005.00152.x]

24. Zehnder M. Root canal irrigants. J Endod. 2006; 32(5):389-98. [DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2005.09.014] [PMID: 16631834]

25. Pavlović V, Živković S. The effect of different irrigation techniques on the quality of cleaning of root canal walls. Stomatološki glasnik Srbije. 2008; 55(4):221-8. [DOI: 10.2298/SGS0804221P]

26. Paqué F, Balmer M, Attin T, Peters OA. Preparation of oval-shaped root canals in mandibular molars using nickel-titanium rotary instruments: a micro-computed tomography study. J Endod. 2010; 36(4):703-7. [DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2009.12.020] [PMID: 20307747]

27. Prati C, Foschi F, Nucci C, Montebugnoli L, Marchionni S. Appearance of the root canal walls after preparation with NiTi rotary instruments: a comparative SEM investigation. Clin Oral Investig. 2004; 8(2):102-10. [DOI: 10.1007/s00784-004-0253-8] [PMID: 14760541]

28. Baumann M. The RaCe system. Endod Prac. 2003; 6:5-13.

29. Merrett SJ, Bryant ST, Dummer PM. Comparison of the shaping ability of RaCe and FlexMaster rotary nickel-titanium systems in simulated canals. J Endod. 2006; 32(10):960-2. [DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2006.03.002] [PMID: 16982273]

30. Pasternak-Júnior B, Sousa-Neto MD, Silva RG. Canal transportation and centring ability of RaCe rotary instruments. Int Endod J. 2009; 42(6):499-506. [DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2008.01536.x] [PMID: 19298575]

31. Schäfer E, Vlassis M. Comparative investigation of two rotary nickeltitanium instruments: ProTaper versus RaCe. Part 2. Cleaning effectiveness and shaping ability in severely curved root canals of extracted teeth. Int Endod J. 2004; 37(4):239-48. [DOI: 10.1111/j.0143-2885.2004.00783.x] [PMID: 15056350]

32. Daghustani M, Alhammadi A, Merdad K, Ohlin J, Erhardt F, Ahlquist M. Comparison between high concentration EDTA (24%) and low concentration EDTA (3%) with surfactant upon removal of smear layer after rotary instrumentation: a SEM study. Swed Dent J. 2011; 35(1):9-15. [PMID: 21591595]

33. Usman N, Baumgartner JC, Marshall JG. Influence of instrument size on root canal debridment. J Endod. 2004; 30(2):110-2. [DOI: 10.1097/00004770-200402000-00012] [PMID: 14977309]

34. Poulsen WB, Dove SB, del Rio CE. Effect of nickel-titanium enginedriven instrument rotational speed on root canal morphology. J Endod. 1995; 21(12):609-12. [DOI: 10.1016/S0099-2399(06)81113-1] [PMID: 8596082]

35. Card SJ, Sigurdsson A, Orstavik D, Trope M. The effectiveness of increased apical enlargement in reducing intracanal bacteria. J Endod. 2002; 28(11):779-83. [DOI: 10.1097/00004770-200211000-00008] [PMID: 12470024]

36. Bürklein S, Hinschitza K, Dammaschke T, Schäfer E. Shaping ability and cleaning effectiveness of two single-file systems in severely curved root canals of extracted teeth: Reciproc and WaveOne versus Mtwo and ProTaper. Int Endod J. 2012; 45(5):449-61. [DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2011.01996.x] [PMID: 22188401]

Journal Information

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 208 208 25
PDF Downloads 56 56 13