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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Aminoshariae, Anita, Kulild, James C.
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