Reduction in bacterial counts in infected root canals after rotary or hand nickel–titanium instrumentation – a clinical study
Article first published online: 21 JAN 2013
© 2013 International Endodontic Journal. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd
International Endodontic Journal
Volume 46, Issue 7, pages 681–687, July 2013
How to Cite
Reduction in bacterial counts in infected root canals after rotary or hand nickel–titanium instrumentation - a clinical study. International Endodontic Journal International Endodontic Journal, 00, 000–000, 2013., , .
- Issue published online: 8 JUN 2013
- Article first published online: 21 JAN 2013
- Accepted manuscript online: 14 DEC 2012 07:22AM EST
- Manuscript Accepted: 10 DEC 2012
- Manuscript Received: 3 OCT 2012
- Fundação Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro
- Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq), Brazilian Governmental Institutions
- apical periodontitis;
- bacterial reduction;
- endodontic treatment;
- nickel–titanium hand instruments;
- nickel–titanium rotary instruments
To compare the antibacterial efficacy of two instrumentation techniques, one using hand nickel–titanium (NiTi) instruments and the other using rotary NiTi instruments, in root canals of teeth with apical periodontitis.
Root canals from single-rooted teeth were instrumented using either hand NiTi instruments in the alternated rotation motion technique or rotary BioRaCe instruments. The irrigant used in both groups was 2.5% NaOCl. DNA extracts from samples taken before and after instrumentation were subjected to quantitative analysis by real-time polymerase chain reaction (qPCR). Qualitative analysis was also performed using presence/absence data from culture and qPCR assays.
Bacteria were detected in all S1 samples by both methods. In culture analysis, 45% and 35% of the canals were still positive for bacterial presence after hand and rotary NiTi instrumentation, respectively (P > 0.05). Rotary NiTi instrumentation resulted in significantly fewer qPCR-positive cases (60%) than hand NiTi instrumentation (95%) (P = 0.01). Intergroup comparison of quantitative data showed no significant difference between the two techniques.
There was no significant difference in bacterial reduction in infected canals after instrumentation using hand or rotary NiTi instruments. In terms of incidence of positive results for bacteria, culture also showed no significant differences between the groups, but the rotary NiTi instrumentation resulted in more negative results in the more sensitive qPCR analysis.