Cargando…
Size of Master Apical File and Optimal Irrigation of the Apical Zone: A Systematic Review
INTRODUCTION: To determine what would be the minimal apical diameter for optimal chemomechanical preparation in the root canal system in terms of debridement and/or irrigation delivery, in patients undergoing nonsurgical root canal treatment. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Randomized controlled clinical tri...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Iranian Center for Endodontic Research
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9985682/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36883036 http://dx.doi.org/10.22037/iej.v13i4.22287 |
_version_ | 1784901008290217984 |
---|---|
author | Aminoshariae, Anita Kulild, James C. |
author_facet | Aminoshariae, Anita Kulild, James C. |
author_sort | Aminoshariae, Anita |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: To determine what would be the minimal apical diameter for optimal chemomechanical preparation in the root canal system in terms of debridement and/or irrigation delivery, in patients undergoing nonsurgical root canal treatment. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Randomized controlled clinical trials, cohorts, cross-over studies from peer-reviewed journals published in English from January 1950 to June 2018 which reported outcome in terms of healing, microbial reduction and/or effectiveness of irrigation delivery to the apical third of the root canal system. Two reviewers conducted a comprehensive literature search. There were no disagreements between the two reviewers. The articles that met the inclusion criteria went through a predefined review process. RESULTS: Due to the variety of methodologies and different techniques used to measure outcome for master apical file enlargement, it was not possible to standardize the research data and to perform meta-analysis. Twelve clinical articles were identified that met the inclusion criteria. CONCLUSIONS: The overall level of evidence on this topic was moderate (fair). From this systematic review, the majority of the studies collected and referred to recommend sizes higher than #30 as the minimal size in order to adequately prepare the apical region of the root canals. Only 2 out of 12 studies suggested the size #25 as acceptable. From this systematic review it may be concluded that a larger MAF preparation above size 30 aids chemomechanical action. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9985682 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Iranian Center for Endodontic Research |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-99856822023-03-06 Size of Master Apical File and Optimal Irrigation of the Apical Zone: A Systematic Review Aminoshariae, Anita Kulild, James C. Iran Endod J Original Article INTRODUCTION: To determine what would be the minimal apical diameter for optimal chemomechanical preparation in the root canal system in terms of debridement and/or irrigation delivery, in patients undergoing nonsurgical root canal treatment. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Randomized controlled clinical trials, cohorts, cross-over studies from peer-reviewed journals published in English from January 1950 to June 2018 which reported outcome in terms of healing, microbial reduction and/or effectiveness of irrigation delivery to the apical third of the root canal system. Two reviewers conducted a comprehensive literature search. There were no disagreements between the two reviewers. The articles that met the inclusion criteria went through a predefined review process. RESULTS: Due to the variety of methodologies and different techniques used to measure outcome for master apical file enlargement, it was not possible to standardize the research data and to perform meta-analysis. Twelve clinical articles were identified that met the inclusion criteria. CONCLUSIONS: The overall level of evidence on this topic was moderate (fair). From this systematic review, the majority of the studies collected and referred to recommend sizes higher than #30 as the minimal size in order to adequately prepare the apical region of the root canals. Only 2 out of 12 studies suggested the size #25 as acceptable. From this systematic review it may be concluded that a larger MAF preparation above size 30 aids chemomechanical action. Iranian Center for Endodontic Research 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC9985682/ /pubmed/36883036 http://dx.doi.org/10.22037/iej.v13i4.22287 Text en © The Author(s). https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/This work is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/) |
spellingShingle | Original Article Aminoshariae, Anita Kulild, James C. Size of Master Apical File and Optimal Irrigation of the Apical Zone: A Systematic Review |
title | Size of Master Apical File and Optimal Irrigation of the Apical Zone: A Systematic Review |
title_full | Size of Master Apical File and Optimal Irrigation of the Apical Zone: A Systematic Review |
title_fullStr | Size of Master Apical File and Optimal Irrigation of the Apical Zone: A Systematic Review |
title_full_unstemmed | Size of Master Apical File and Optimal Irrigation of the Apical Zone: A Systematic Review |
title_short | Size of Master Apical File and Optimal Irrigation of the Apical Zone: A Systematic Review |
title_sort | size of master apical file and optimal irrigation of the apical zone: a systematic review |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9985682/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36883036 http://dx.doi.org/10.22037/iej.v13i4.22287 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT aminoshariaeanita sizeofmasterapicalfileandoptimalirrigationoftheapicalzoneasystematicreview AT kulildjamesc sizeofmasterapicalfileandoptimalirrigationoftheapicalzoneasystematicreview |