Potency Of Manual Instrumentation To The Rotary Instrumentation For Primary Teeth Pulpectomies: A Clinical Comparrative Study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47750/pnr.2022.13.S05.183Abstract
Background: Using hand files in primary teeth is time-consuming, can lead to the formation of unwanted curvatures, and can cause
iatrogenic errors. To overcome these difficulties, rotary instrumentation using nickel-titanium files was done.
Aims: The present study was conducted to clinically evaluate and assess the difference in manual versus rotary instrumentation in root
canals of primary teeth concerning instrumentation duration, obturation duration, quality of fills, and complications encountered. Also,
the success of pulpectomy using hand files versus rotary files was assessed.
Materials and Methods: 40 primary mandibular molars were randomly allocated to two groups namely control group subjects (n=20)
that were treated using manual instrumentation and intervention group (n=20) using rotary instrumentation. The success was established
in absence of excessive tooth mobility, sinus tract presence, gingival abscess/swelling, tenderness on percussion, and/or pain history.
The collected data were subjected to statistical evaluation for results formulation.
Results: The mean time for instrumentation was 25.69±3.82 minutes for the manual instrumentation group, whereas, for the rotary
group it was significantly lesser (19.35±4.92) with p<0.0001. Mean obturation time for the manual group was 5.21±0.89 minutes and
was lesser for the rotary group with 4.71±0.97 minutes (p=0.09). At 3 and 6 months, 97.36% (n=37) cases were considered successful
in the manual instrumentation group, whereas 92.10% (n=35) cases in the rotary group were successful. At 18 months, 91.66% (n=33)
pulpectomies were considered clinically successful in the manual group and 86.11% (n=31) cases in the rotary group were successful
clinically.
Conclusion: The present study concludes that less instrumentation time is needed with rotary instruments than manual instruments.
Obturation quality and clinical success were similar in both manual and rotary instrumentation.