The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Volume  25 (2024)
Volume  24 (2023)
Volume  23 (2022)
Volume  22 (2021)
Volume  21 (2020)
Volume  20 (2019)
Volume  19 (2018)
Volume  18 (2017)
Volume  17 (2016)
Volume  16 (2015)
Volume  15 (2014)
Volume  14 (2013)
Volume  13 (2012)
Volume  12 (2011)
Volume  11 (2010)
Volume  10 (2009)
Volume  9 (2008)
Volume  8 (2007)
Volume  7 (2006)
Volume  6 (2005)
Volume  5 (2004)
Volume  4 (2003)
Volume  3 (2002)
Volume  2 (2001)
Volume  1 (1999)
Related articles

VOLUME 21 , ISSUE 8 ( August, 2020 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Evaluation of Cleaning Efficacy of S-One and WaveOne File Systems Using Scanning Electron Microscopy Analysis: An In Vitro Study

Sai S Ramachandran, Chinnu R Koshy, Shankar Narayanan, Balakrishnan Venkatesh, Rajasekaran M Sundaran, Chellaswamy S Karumaran

Citation Information : Ramachandran SS, Koshy CR, Narayanan S, Venkatesh B, Sundaran RM, Karumaran CS. Evaluation of Cleaning Efficacy of S-One and WaveOne File Systems Using Scanning Electron Microscopy Analysis: An In Vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2020; 21 (8):841-845.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2898

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 21-12-2020

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2020; The Author(s).


Abstract

Aim: The aim of this study is to compare the canal cleaning ability of S-One file (AF BLUE) system with WaveOne Gold single file system, using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Materials and methods: In the present study, 40 freshly extracted permanent mandibular premolars with a single-root canal and straight roots were selected. The teeth were randomly divided into three groups. The canals were prepared by crown-down technique. Buccolingual sectioning of the samples were done followed by SEM evaluation. Data were statistically analyzed using Kruskal–Wallis test. The statistical significance level was set at p value <0.05. Results: The analysis of the results demonstrated that WaveOne presented higher cleaning capacity of root canals with a statistically significant difference, when compared to S-One file system (p value < 0.05). Both the file systems showed significant cleaning efficacy in the coronal and middle-thirds of the root canals when compared to the apical thirds. Also, the WaveOne showed better results than S-One (AF BLUE), and the results were statistically significant. Conclusion: With the limitation of the study, the cleaning ability of rotary file system is high in coronal and middle-third followed by apical third. In this study, the WaveOne showed better results than S-One (AF BLUE), and the results were statistically significant. Clinical significance: The aggressive cutting of dentin during canal preparation is less in WaveOne file than S-One file system. The cleaning efficiency is good in reciprocating file system (WaveOne) than continuous rotary file system (S-One).

HTML PDF Share
  1. Cohen S, Burns R. Pathways of the pulp 4th ed., St Louis: CV Mosby Co; 1987. pp. 640-–684.
  2. Luiten DJ, Morgan LA, Baumgartner JC, et al. A comparison of four instrumentation techniques on apical canal transportation. J Endodon 1995;21(1):26–32. DOI: 10.1016/s0099-2399(06)80553-4.
  3. Civjan S, Huget EF, DeSimon LB. Potential applications of certain nickel-titanium (nitinol) alloys. J Dent Res 1975;54(1):89–96. DOI: 10.1177/00220345750540014301.
  4. Walia H, Brantley WA, Gerstein H. An initial investigation of the bending and torsional properties of nitinol root canal files. J Endodon 1988;14(7):346–351. DOI: 10.1016/s0099-2399(88)80196-1.
  5. Thompson SA, Dummer PMH. Shaping ability of ProFile .04 taper series 29 rotary nickel–titanium instruments in simulated canals. Part 1. Int Endod J 1997;30(1):1–7. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.1997.tb01093.x.
  6. Park SY, Cheung GSP, Yum J, et al. Dynamic torsional resistance of nickel-titanium rotary instruments. J Endod 2010;36(7):1200–1204. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2010.02.016.
  7. Lopes HP, Gambarra-Soares T, Elias CN, et al. Comparison of the mechanical properties of rotary instruments made of conventional nickel-titanium wire, M-wire, or nickel-titanium alloy in R-phase. J Endod 2013;39(4):516–520. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2012.12.006.
  8. Elnaghy AM, Elsaka SE. Evaluation of root canal transportation, centering ratio, and remaining dentin thickness associated with ProTaper next instruments with and without glide path. J Endod 2014;40(12):2053–2056. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2014.09.001.
  9. Shen Y, Zhou H, Zheng Y, et al. Metallurgical characterization of controlled memory wire nickel-titanium rotary instruments. J Endod 2011;37(11):1566–1571. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2011.08.005.
  10. Capar ID, Ertas H, Ok E, Arslan H, et al. Comparative study of different novel nickel-titanium rotary systems for root canal preparation in severely curved root canals. J Endod 2014;40(6):852–856. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2013.10.010.
  11. Schafer E, Florek H. Efficiency of rotary nickel–titanium K3 instruments compared with stainless steel hand K-Flexofile. Part 1. Shaping ability in simulated curved canals. Int Endod J 2003;36(3):199–207. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.2003.00643.x.
  12. De-Deus G, Moreira EJL, Lopes HP, et al. Extended cyclic fatigue life of F2 ProTaper instruments used in reciprocating movement. Int Endod J 2010;43(12):1063–1068. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2010.01756.x.
  13. Webber J, Machtou P, et al. The WaveOne single-file reciprocating system. Roots 2011;1:28–33.
  14. Webber J. Shaping canals with confidence: WaveOne GOLD single- file reciprocating system. Roots 2015;1:34–40.
  15. http://fantadental.com/col.jsp?id=127.
  16. Hulsmann M, Herbs U, Schafers F. Comparative study of root canal preparation using light speed and quantec SC rotary NiTi instruments. Int Endod J 2003;36(11):748–756. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.2003.00725.x.
  17. Versumer J, Hulsmann M, Schafers F. A comparative study of root canal preparation using Profile. 04 and light speed rotary Ni-Ti instruments. Int Endod J 2002;35(1):37–46. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.2002.00454.x.
  18. Moghaddam KN, Mehran M, Zadeh HF. Root canal cleaning efficacy of rotary and hand files instrumentation in primary molars. Int Endod J 2009;4(2):53–57.
  19. Sonntag D, Peters OA. Effect of prion decontamination protocols on nickel-titanium rotary surfaces. J Endod 2007;33(4):442–446. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2006.12.012.
  20. You SY, et al. Efficiency of reciprocating preparation in curved root canals. J Endod 2010;36:584.
  21. Johnson E, Lloyd A, Kuttler S, et al. Comparison between a novel nickel-titanium alloy and 508 nitinol on the cyclic fatigue life of ProFile 25/.04 rotary instruments. J Endod 2008;34(11):1406–1409. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2008.07.029.
  22. Berutti E, Paolino DS, Chiandussi G, et al. Root canal anatomy preservation of WaveOne reciprocating files with or without glide path. J Endod 2012;38(1):101–104. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2011. 09.030.
  23. Malentacca A, Lalli F. Use of nicakel titanium instruments with reciprocating movement. Italian Journal of Endodontics 2002;6: 79–84.
  24. Dhingra A, Gupta R, Singh A. Comparison of centric ability of porter next, wave one & protaper using cone beam computed tomography. Endodontics 2014;26:244–251.
  25. Usman N, Baumgartner JC, Marshall JG. Influence of instrument size on root canal debridement. J Endod 2004;30(2):110–112. DOI: 10.1097/00004770-200402000-00012.
  26. Mayer BE, Peters OA, Barbakow F. Effects of rotary instruments and ultrasonic irrigation on debris and smear layer scores: a scanning electron microscopic study. Int Endod J 2002;35(7):582–589. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.2002.00502.x.
  27. Weine FS, Kelly RF, Lid PJ. The effect of preparation procedures on original canal shape and on apical foramen shape. J Endodon 1975;1(8):255–262. DOI: 10.1016/S0099-2399(75)80037-9.
  28. Walton RE. Histologic evaluation of different methods of enlarging the pulp canal space. J Endodon 1976;2(10):304–311. DOI: 10.1016/S0099-2399(76)80045-3.
  29. Mizrahi SJ, Tucker JW, Seltzer S. A scanning electron microscopic study of the efficacy of various endodontic instruments. J Endodon 1975;1(10):324–333. DOI: 10.1016/s0099-2399(75)80012-4.
  30. Schneider SW. A comparison of canal preparations in straight and curved root canals. Oral Surg 1971;32(2):271–275. DOI: 10.1016/0030-4220(71)90230-1.
  31. Southard DW, Oswald RJ, Natkin E. Instrumentation of curved molar root canals with the Roane technique. J Endodon 1967;13(10): 479–489. DOI: 10.1016/S0099-2399(87)80015-8.
  32. Bechelli C, Zecchi Orlandini S, Colafranceschi M. Scanning electron microscope study on the efficacy of root canal wall debridement of hand versus Lightspeed instrumentation. Int Endod J 1999;32(6): 484–493. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.1999.00250.x.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.