Home
Introduction
Training and Courses
Apply For Fellowship
Different Rotary Systems
Techniques RCT preparation
Endodontic Irrigation
Endodontic Obturation
Apical Gauging
Endodontic Access
Case Examples
Electronic Apex locators
Endodontic Retreatment
Lasers in Endodontics
Endodontics journals and links
Rotary Endo Reviews
Join Discussion List 
Dental Articles
Endodontic Diagnosis
CONTACT Us

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Use of Non tapered LSX is a must for Apical Gauging

Every tooth and evey canal in each individual varies and size. It is vital that we know the apical diameter at the start. Two studies mentioned here clearly show that only LSX instrument can tell you the apical canal diameter correctly.
An In Vivo Evaluation of Two Types of Files used to Accurately Determine the Diameter of the Apical Constriction of a Root Canal: An In Vivo Study Sumeet Darda, BDS, MDS; Narendra Manwar, BDS, MDS; Manoj Chandak, BDS, MDS; D. D. Shori, BDS, MDS

This study is published in July 2009 issue of Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice.It concluded:
The average size of the FLSB to bind against the canal walls first at the working length was approximately two ISO sizes larger than the FKFB (P<0.001). The initiation of canal instrumentation with a K-file size three sizes beyond the mean values of the FLSB (First LightSpeed to Bind) will result in greater final enlargement of the canal compared to starting with the FKFB (First K File to Bind). This increased canal enlargement facilitates improved mechanical and chemical cleansing of the root canal ensuring removal of more microorganisms and their substrates, thus, improving the outcome of the treatment. Read Full paper

Comparison in vivo of the first tapered and nontapered instruments that bind at the apical constriction

Anda Kfir,Esther Rosenberg,Zvi Fuss, Triple O journal, Volume 102, Issue 3, Pages 395-398 (September 2006)
Objective

To compare sizes of the first instrument with or without taper that binds to the narrow apical diameter of the root canal after coronal flaring.

Study design

For the study, 388 canals were examined in patients with intact apices. A standard endodontic access cavity was prepared and the coronal third flared using standardized K-files, Gates Glidden reamers, or Profile rotary instruments. Apical patency was established using K-file size 10 and working length determined using an apex locator and radiographs. Standardized K-file hand instruments were gently introduced to working length beginning with size 15. The first K-file to bind to the canal walls and reach the working length was recorded as FKFB. Nontapered instruments (Lightspeed) were then gently introduced by hand to each canal in ascending order beginning with size 20 to working length. The first instrument to bind to the canal walls and reach the working length was recorded as FLSB. Statistical analysis was carried out using univariate analysis of variance.

Results

The average size of FLSB was approximately 2 ISO sizes larger than FKFB (P < .001). Minimal differences were found in the maxillary central incisors (6.7 ± 3.0) and maximal differences in canals from maxillary lateral incisors (15.4 ± 3.5).

Conclusions

The first nontapered instruments to bind at the apical constriction were larger and reflected the actual narrow apical diameter of the canal better than the tapered instruments.

So please use a non tapered instrument to do apical gauging if you want to follow science. Recent study published in the journal of Gen Dent in Sept-Oct 2007 by By Francis W. Allen clearly demonstrates that with tapered instruments you are able to clean only 18% of the apical 1 mm, it is because of body defenses that we still succeed in 70% cases. To download full paper CLICK HERE