Cargando…

Evaluation and Comparison of Effectiveness of Kedo-S Pediatric Rotary Files vs Manual Instrumentation for Root Canal Treatment in Primary Molars

PURPOSE: To evaluate and compare the clinical and radiographic success of Kedo-S pediatric rotary files vs manual K-Files for pulpectomy in primary mandibular molars. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A sample of 30 primary mandibular molars with irreversible pulpitis was taken per group. The groups were divid...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rajain, Tanu, Tsomu, Kesang, Namdev, Ritu
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10067992/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37020778
http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10005-2511
_version_ 1785018593179598848
author Rajain, Tanu
Tsomu, Kesang
Namdev, Ritu
author_facet Rajain, Tanu
Tsomu, Kesang
Namdev, Ritu
author_sort Rajain, Tanu
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To evaluate and compare the clinical and radiographic success of Kedo-S pediatric rotary files vs manual K-Files for pulpectomy in primary mandibular molars. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A sample of 30 primary mandibular molars with irreversible pulpitis was taken per group. The groups were divided as below mentioned—group I (n = 30) was treated using the Kedo-S file system. Group II (n = 30)—treated using manual stainless steel K-File. The clinical and radiographic success was compared of both techniques. Statistical analysis involved t-test, Chi-squared test, and Cochran's Q test. RESULTS: The overall clinical success at 3, 6, and 9 months in group I were 72.4, 89.7, and 93%, respectively and in group II were 82.1, 92.9, and 92.9%, respectively. The overall radiographic success in group I at 3, 6, and 9 months were 6.9, 17.2, and 69%, respectively and in group II were 0, 7.1, and 35.7%, respectively. According to the Frankl behavior rating scale, 19 children in group I (65.5%) showed negative behavior, and 15 children in group II (53.57%) showed positive behavior. The mean instrumentation time in group I (Kedo-S pediatric rotary file group) and group II (hand K-File group) was 8.03 ± 0.823 and 11.25 ± 0.928, respectively. CONCLUSION: There was a statistically significant/highly significant difference in intergroup comparison postoperative behavior among the children in the two study groups. There was a statistically significant difference between the two study groups with relation to instrumentation time. The trend that was observed in the clinical and radiographic profile was that group I (Kedo-S rotary files) cases had more success when absolute numbers and figures were compared than group II (hand stainless steel K-File) in which success rates were comparable; however, the difference between the groups were found to be statistically nonsignificant. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Rajain T, Tsomu K, Namdev R. Evaluation and Comparison of Effectiveness of Kedo-S Pediatric Rotary Files vs Manual Instrumentation for Root Canal Treatment in Primary Molars. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2023;16(1):22-29.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10067992
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100679922023-04-04 Evaluation and Comparison of Effectiveness of Kedo-S Pediatric Rotary Files vs Manual Instrumentation for Root Canal Treatment in Primary Molars Rajain, Tanu Tsomu, Kesang Namdev, Ritu Int J Clin Pediatr Dent Original Research PURPOSE: To evaluate and compare the clinical and radiographic success of Kedo-S pediatric rotary files vs manual K-Files for pulpectomy in primary mandibular molars. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A sample of 30 primary mandibular molars with irreversible pulpitis was taken per group. The groups were divided as below mentioned—group I (n = 30) was treated using the Kedo-S file system. Group II (n = 30)—treated using manual stainless steel K-File. The clinical and radiographic success was compared of both techniques. Statistical analysis involved t-test, Chi-squared test, and Cochran's Q test. RESULTS: The overall clinical success at 3, 6, and 9 months in group I were 72.4, 89.7, and 93%, respectively and in group II were 82.1, 92.9, and 92.9%, respectively. The overall radiographic success in group I at 3, 6, and 9 months were 6.9, 17.2, and 69%, respectively and in group II were 0, 7.1, and 35.7%, respectively. According to the Frankl behavior rating scale, 19 children in group I (65.5%) showed negative behavior, and 15 children in group II (53.57%) showed positive behavior. The mean instrumentation time in group I (Kedo-S pediatric rotary file group) and group II (hand K-File group) was 8.03 ± 0.823 and 11.25 ± 0.928, respectively. CONCLUSION: There was a statistically significant/highly significant difference in intergroup comparison postoperative behavior among the children in the two study groups. There was a statistically significant difference between the two study groups with relation to instrumentation time. The trend that was observed in the clinical and radiographic profile was that group I (Kedo-S rotary files) cases had more success when absolute numbers and figures were compared than group II (hand stainless steel K-File) in which success rates were comparable; however, the difference between the groups were found to be statistically nonsignificant. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Rajain T, Tsomu K, Namdev R. Evaluation and Comparison of Effectiveness of Kedo-S Pediatric Rotary Files vs Manual Instrumentation for Root Canal Treatment in Primary Molars. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2023;16(1):22-29. Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC10067992/ /pubmed/37020778 http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10005-2511 Text en Copyright © 2023; The Author(s). https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/© The Author(s). 2023 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and non-commercial reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Original Research
Rajain, Tanu
Tsomu, Kesang
Namdev, Ritu
Evaluation and Comparison of Effectiveness of Kedo-S Pediatric Rotary Files vs Manual Instrumentation for Root Canal Treatment in Primary Molars
title Evaluation and Comparison of Effectiveness of Kedo-S Pediatric Rotary Files vs Manual Instrumentation for Root Canal Treatment in Primary Molars
title_full Evaluation and Comparison of Effectiveness of Kedo-S Pediatric Rotary Files vs Manual Instrumentation for Root Canal Treatment in Primary Molars
title_fullStr Evaluation and Comparison of Effectiveness of Kedo-S Pediatric Rotary Files vs Manual Instrumentation for Root Canal Treatment in Primary Molars
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation and Comparison of Effectiveness of Kedo-S Pediatric Rotary Files vs Manual Instrumentation for Root Canal Treatment in Primary Molars
title_short Evaluation and Comparison of Effectiveness of Kedo-S Pediatric Rotary Files vs Manual Instrumentation for Root Canal Treatment in Primary Molars
title_sort evaluation and comparison of effectiveness of kedo-s pediatric rotary files vs manual instrumentation for root canal treatment in primary molars
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10067992/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37020778
http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10005-2511
work_keys_str_mv AT rajaintanu evaluationandcomparisonofeffectivenessofkedospediatricrotaryfilesvsmanualinstrumentationforrootcanaltreatmentinprimarymolars
AT tsomukesang evaluationandcomparisonofeffectivenessofkedospediatricrotaryfilesvsmanualinstrumentationforrootcanaltreatmentinprimarymolars
AT namdevritu evaluationandcomparisonofeffectivenessofkedospediatricrotaryfilesvsmanualinstrumentationforrootcanaltreatmentinprimarymolars