• A S Waly, I Yamany, H M Abbas, M A A Alsairafi, R M F Bazzaz, D F Bogari, and T Y Alhazzazi.
• Lecturer of Pediatric Dentistry and Dental Public Health, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Al-Azhar University Assiut Branch, Egypt; Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Vision College for Dentistry and Nursing, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
• Niger J Clin Pract. 2021 Oct 1; 24 (10): 1492-1498.

BackgroundPulpal involvement, secondary to dental caries, is not uncommon and is a challenging task for pediatric dentists. Morphological differences in root canal of deciduous teeth increases the complexity of management. The aim of this study was to compare two rotary file systems and hand instrumentation for root canal preparation in regard to canal transportation, centering ability ratio, and dentin thickness using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT).MethodsA total of 72 canals from 24 freshly extracted mandibular deciduous second molars were divided into a set of 8 teeth, then prepared using 2 rotary files systems: the Kedo-S pediatric file system (Group A) and Pro AF Baby Gold file system (Group B) were compared to hand instrumentation (Group C). CBCT scans before and after root canal preparation were used to evaluate tested parameters. Instrumentation time for all three techniques was also measured using a chronometer.ResultsAlthough rotary file systems have shown superior results in root canal preparation as compared to hand instrumentation, no significant differences were observed between all the groups for canal transportation and dentin thickness at all three levels of prepared canals. A comparison of centering ability ratio between all the groups was found to be statistically significant only at the cervical level. A significant difference was observed between hand instrumentation using K-files (117.3 s) and both rotary systems (Kedo-S (81 s) and Pro AF Baby Gold (81.5 s)) in terms of canal preparation time (P < 0.001).ConclusionsBoth tested rotary systems and hand instrumentation demonstrated comparable canal preparation results, with differences that were statistically non-significant in most tested parameters, without shaping errors. However, both the rotary systems were more efficient and faster than hand instrumentation.

17 keywords...

hide…