Influence of cervical preflaring on apical file size determination.

AIM

To investigate the influence of cervical preflaring with different instruments (Gates-Glidden drills, Quantec Flare series instruments and LA Axxess burs) on the first file that binds at working length (WL) in maxillary central incisors.

METHODOLOGY

Forty human maxillary central incisors with complete root formation were used. After standard access cavities, a size 06 K-file was inserted into each canal until the apical foramen was reached. The WL was set 1 mm short of the apical foramen. Group 1 received the initial apical instrument without previous preflaring of the cervical and middle thirds of the root canal. Group 2 had the cervical and middle portion of the root canals enlarged with Gates-Glidden drills sizes 90, 110 and 130. Group 3 had the cervical and middle thirds of the root canals enlarged with nickel-titanium Quantec Flare series instruments. Titanium-nitrite treated, stainless steel LA Axxess burs were used for preflaring the cervical and middle portions of root canals from group 4. Each canal was sized using manual K-files, starting with size 08 files with passive movements until the WL was reached. File sizes were increased until a binding sensation was felt at the WL, and the instrument size was recorded for each tooth. The apical region was then observed under a stereoscopic magnifier, images were recorded digitally and the differences between root canal and maximum file diameters were evaluated for each sample.

RESULTS

Significant differences were found between experimental groups regarding anatomical diameter at the WL and the first file to bind in the canal (P < 0.01, 95% confidence interval). The major discrepancy was found when no preflaring was performed (0.151 mm average). The LA Axxess burs produced the smallest differences between anatomical diameter and first file to bind (0.016 mm average). Gates-Glidden drills and Flare instruments were ranked in an intermediary position, with no statistically significant differences between them (0.093 mm average).

CONCLUSIONS

The instrument binding technique for determining anatomical diameter at WL is not precise. Preflaring of the cervical and middle thirds of the root canal improved anatomical diameter determination; the instrument used for preflaring played a major role in determining the anatomical diameter at the WL. Canals preflared with LA Axxess burs created a more accurate relationship between file size and anatomical diameter.