Clinical comparison of the effectiveness of single-file reciprocating systems and rotary systems for removal of endotoxins and cultivable bacteria from primarily infected root canals.
BACKGROUND
This clinical study was conducted to compare the effectiveness of single-file reciprocating systems and rotary systems in removing endotoxins and cultivable bacteria from primarily infected root canals.


METHODS
Forty-eight primarily infected root canals were selected and randomly divided into 4 groups: WaveOne (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland) (n = 12); Reciproc (VDW, Munich, Germany) (n = 12), ProTaper (Dentsply Maillefer) (n = 12), and Mtwo (VDW) (n = 12). Samples were collected before and after chemomechanical preparation. The irrigation was performed by using 2.5% sodium hypochlorite. A chromogenic limulus amebocyte lysate assay test was used to quantify endotoxins. Culture techniques were used to determine bacterial colony-forming unit counts.


RESULTS
In the baseline samples (ie, samples collected before chemomechanical preparation), endotoxins and cultivable bacteria were recovered from 100% of the root canal samples. No differences were found in the median percentage values of endotoxin reduction achieved with reciprocating systems (ie, WaveOne [95.15%] and Reciproc [96.21%]) and with rotary systems (ie, ProTaper [97.98%] and Mtwo [96.34%]) (P < .05). Both single-file reciprocating systems (ie, WaveOne [99.45%] and Reciproc [99.93%]) and rotary systems (ProTaper [99.85%] and Mtwo [99.41%]) were effective in reducing the cultivable bacteria (all P < .05). Moreover, the culture analysis revealed no differences in bacterial load reduction (P > .05).


CONCLUSIONS
Both single-file reciprocating systems (ie, WaveOne and Reciproc instruments) and rotary systems (ie, ProTaper and Mtwo instruments) showed similar effectiveness in reducing endotoxins and cultivable bacteria from primarily infected root canals, but they were not able to eliminate them from all root canals analyzed.
Endodontic Division, Department of Restorative Dentistry, São José dos Campos Dental School, State University of São Paulo, UNESP, São Paulo, Brazil. Electronic address: Frederico.martinho@fosjc.unesp.br.
Frederico C
FC
Martinho
Endodontic Division, Department of Restorative Dentistry, São José dos Campos Dental School, State University of São Paulo, UNESP, São Paulo, Brazil.
Ana P M
AP
Gomes
Endodontic Division, Department of Restorative Dentistry, São José dos Campos Dental School, State University of São Paulo, UNESP, São Paulo, Brazil.
Aletéia M M
AM
Fernandes
Endodontic Division, Department of Restorative Dentistry, São José dos Campos Dental School, State University of São Paulo, UNESP, São Paulo, Brazil.
Nádia S
NS
Ferreira
Endodontic Division, Department of Restorative Dentistry, São José dos Campos Dental School, State University of São Paulo, UNESP, São Paulo, Brazil.
Marcos S
MS
Endo
Endodontic Division, Department of Restorative Dentistry, São José dos Campos Dental School, State University of São Paulo, UNESP, São Paulo, Brazil.
Lilian F
LF
Freitas
Endodontic Division, Department of Restorative Dentistry, Fluminense Federal University, Niteroi, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Izabel C G
IC
Camões
D001419:Bacteria / Q000302:isolation & purification*; D058491:Bacterial Load; D001431:Bacteriological Techniques; D003786:Dental Pulp Cavity / Q000382:microbiology*; D003788:Dental Pulp Diseases / Q000382:microbiology / Q000628:therapy*; D004731:Endotoxins / Q000032:analysis*; D004867:Equipment Design; D006801:Humans; D012388:Root Canal Irrigants / Q000627:therapeutic use; D018915:Root Canal Preparation / Q000295:instrumentation*; D012973:Sodium Hypochlorite / Q000627:therapeutic use; D007507:Therapeutic Irrigation / Q000379:methods; D016896:Treatment Outcome
D004731:Endotoxins; D012388:Root Canal Irrigants; D012973:Sodium Hypochlorite
Bacteria; disinfection; endodontics; endotoxin; root canal