Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Summer;17(3):126-131.
doi: 10.22037/iej.v17i3.35487.

Dentine Thickness of Second Mesibuccal Canals in First Maxillary Molars Prepared with Rotary Instruments

Maryam Forghani  1 , Ali Hamedi  2 , Monireh Khorasani  2 , Siavash Moushekhian  3 , Nasir Kheirabadi  3
Affiliations

Dentine Thickness of Second Mesibuccal Canals in First Maxillary Molars Prepared with Rotary Instruments

Maryam Forghani et al. Iran Endod J. 2022 Summer.

Abstract

Introduction: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the thickness of the remaining dentine wall in the danger zone of the second mesiobuccal (MB2) canals using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) in maxillary first molars following preparation by means of HERO 642 rotary instruments with different tapers.

Methods and materials: The study samples included twenty-five mesiobuccal roots of maxillary first molars. A two-step method was employed to prepare the MB2 canals applying HERO 642 instruments: using a 0.02 taper (step 1), and a 0.04 taper (step 2). The roots were scanned before preparation, and after each step. The thickness of the dentine wall was recorded at the CEJ level, as well as 2 mm and 4 mm below the CEJ. The repeated-measures ANOVA in conjunction with the Cochran tests were used to compare the changes in the thickness of the root canal wall.

Results: There was no area with dentine thickness of <0.5 mm before preparation. A significant reduction in dentine thickness occurred following the preparation with both 0.02 and 0.04 files at all three levels compared with the pre-instrumentation values (P< 0.05). However, areas with dentine thickness of < 0.5 mm after preparation using 0.04 files were significantly more than those resulting from the application of 0.02 files both at the CEJ and 2 mm-below-CEJ points, but the differences were not significant at the 4mm-below-CEJ level.

Conclusion: Within the limitations of the present in vitro study, the use of larger taper instruments in MB2 root canals of maxillary first molars increased the quantity of samples with dentine thickness less than 0.5 millimeter at the coronal level of the root canal. It was concluded that instruments with large tapers, should be used with caution in troughing or preparing such root canals to reduce the risk of strip perforation.

Keywords: Cone-Beam Computed Tomography; Dentine Thickness; Maxillary First Molar; Root Canal Preparation; Second Mesiobuccal Root Canal.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

‘None declared’.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Axial Measurements; A) Pre-Instrumentation; B) After preparation with .02 files; C) After preparation with .04 files
Figure 2
Figure 2
Mean dentine thickness of second mesiobuccal canal at three different levels before preparation, preparation with 0.02 and preparation with 0.04
Figure 3
Figure 3
The number of areas with dentine thickness of ≥0.5 mm as well as those <0.5 mm of second mesiobuccal canal at different levels, before and after canal preparation
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Mahran AH, AboEl-Fotouh MM. Comparison of effects of ProTaper, HeroShaper, and Gates Glidden Burs on cervical dentin thickness and root canal volume by using multislice computed tomography. J Endod. 2008;34(10):1219–22. - PubMed
    1. Tambe VH, Nagmode PS, Abraham S, Patait M, Lahoti PV, Jaju N. Comparison of canal transportation and centering ability of rotary protaper, one shape system and wave one system using cone beam computed tomography: an in vitro study. J Conserv Dent. 2014;17(6):561. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Gutmann J, Fan B, Cohen S. Pathways of the pulp. 9th ed. Canada: Mosby; Horgreaves K . pp. 151–5.
    1. Vertucci FJ. Root canal morphology and its relationship to endodontic procedures. Endodontic Topics. 2005;10(1):3–29.
    1. Verma P, Love RM. A Micro CT study of the mesiobuccal root canal morphology of the maxillary first molar tooth. Int Endod J. 2011;44(3):210–7. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources