Effect of Access Cavity Preparation on Dentin Preservation, Biomechanical Property, and Instrumentation Efficacy: A Micro-Computed Tomographic Study.

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the influence of a contracted endodontic cavity (CEC) on dentin preservation, biomechanical property, and instrumentation efficacy of first permanent molars in comparison with a traditional endodontic cavity (TEC).

METHODS

Forty-eight extracted intact maxillary and mandibular first molars were selected and scanned by micro-computed tomographic (micro-CT) imaging. Each tooth type was anatomically matched and assigned to the CEC group or the TEC group (n = 12). After root canal instrumentation with the ProGlider (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland) and WaveOne Gold (Dentsply Maillefer), the specimens were scanned by micro-CT again. Pre- and postpreparation micro-CT imaging was used to evaluate the dentin preservation and instrumentation efficacy. The results on volume and thickness reduction in the coronal dentin and pericervical dentin (PCD), root canal volume and surface area, percentage of unprepared surface area, canal transportation and centering ratio, and canal wall thickness in the "danger zone" were measured and analyzed with the Shapiro-Wilk and independent sample t tests. Based on micro-CT imaging of maxillary and mandibular first molars, CEC and TEC models were constructed on the intact tooth, and 2 different static loads were applied to the occlusal load points. The stress distribution patterns and von Mises stress on the occlusal surface and cervical region were assessed by 3-dimensional finite element analysis.

RESULTS

The CEC had a significantly lower volume and thickness reduction of coronal dentin and PCD above the alveolar crest compared with the TEC group (P < .05), whereas no difference was observed in PCD below the alveolar crest between the 2 groups (P > .05). There was no difference regarding all instrumentation efficacy outcomes (root canal volume and surface area, percentage of unprepared surface area, canal transportation and centering ratio, and canal wall thickness) in the danger zone between the 2 groups (P > .05). The CEC effectively reduced the maximum von Mises stress and stress concentration area on the occlusal surface and cervical region compared with the TEC.

CONCLUSIONS

The CEC preserved more coronal dentin and PCD above the alveolar crest and thus reduced stress concentration on the occlusal surface and cervical region. The CEC had no significant adverse effects on the instrumentation efficacy compared with the TEC given that the instrumentation procedures were performed with ProGlider and WaveOne Gold files.