Bacteria and Hard Tissue Debris Extrusion and Intracanal Bacterial Reduction Promoted by XP-endo Shaper and Reciproc Instruments.

INTRODUCTION

This study used a multipurpose analytic approach to compare the levels of apically extruded bacterial and hard tissue debris as well as intracanal bacterial reduction after root canal preparation with either XP-endo Shaper (FKG Dentaire, La Chaux-de-Fonds, Switzerland) or Reciproc (VDW, Munich, Germany) instruments.

METHODS

Distobuccal canals from extracted maxillary molars were contaminated with Enterococcus faecalis and randomly distributed into 2 groups according to the instrumentation system: the XP-endo Shaper or Reciproc. Teeth were mounted in an apparatus that simulates the apical resistance offered by the periapical tissues and permitted to collect debris extruded during preparation. Saline was used as the irrigant during preparation, and all treatment procedures were performed inside a cabinet under a controlled temperature of 37°C. DNA extracts from samples taken from the canal before and after preparation were subjected to quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction for E. faecalis counting. The volume of extruded debris was evaluated by micro-computed tomographic imaging. DNA was extracted from the extruded hard tissue debris and analyzed by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction.

RESULTS

Mechanical intracanal bacterial reduction was significantly more pronounced when using the XP-endo Shaper (P < .001). Although both instruments produced a similar volume of extruded debris (P > .05), extruded bacteria counts were significantly lower with Reciproc than the XP-endo Shaper (P < .001). No correlation was observed between the extruded bacterial counts and debris volume.

CONCLUSIONS

Although bacterial extrusion was lower with Reciproc, the intracanal bacterial reduction was higher with the XP-endo Shaper. Both techniques produced a similar volume of hard tissue debris extrusion.