CODS Journal of Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 9 , ISSUE 2 ( July-December, 2017 ) > List of Articles

Original Article

Comparative Evaluation of Quality of Obturation in Primary Teeth Using Zinc Oxide Eugenol and Endoflas under Spiral Computed Tomography: An In Vitro Study

Bharath .KP, Poornima P, Nikita Lobo

Keywords : Obturating materials, Pulpectomy, Zinc oxide eugenol,Endoflas

Citation Information : .KP B, P P, Lobo N. Comparative Evaluation of Quality of Obturation in Primary Teeth Using Zinc Oxide Eugenol and Endoflas under Spiral Computed Tomography: An In Vitro Study. CODS J Dent 2017; 9 (2):46-49.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10063-0032

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 00-12-2017

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2017; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Introduction: Success of pulp therapy depends on proper biomechanical preparation, disinfection of canal, dryness of canal and acquisition of proper seal by use of ideal obturating material. Though there are many obturating materials available, there is no proper consensus on the best obturating material for primary teeth. Thus the present study was done to compare and evaluate the quality of obturation using zinc oxide eugenol and endoflas with spiral computed tomography (CT). Materials and methods: Thirty single-rooted primary teeth were selected for the study. They were debrided to the determined working length using K files and prepared for obturation. Teeth were later numbered from 1 to 30 and divided into two groups of 15 teeth each. Preobturation volume of two groups was evaluated using spiral CT followed by which group 1 was obturated using zinc oxide eugenol and group 2 with endoflas using rotary lentulospiral. Another scan with CT was done to check postobturated volumes of both groups. The volumetric analysis was done using Advantage work station software for Windows (GE System, Milwaukee). Tukey\'s post-hoc test, analysis of variance (ANOVA) were used to analyze statistical significance between variable. Results: The mean preobturated volume (POV) of group 1 was 0.00042 ± 0.00001, the mean postobturated volume of group 1 was 0.00039 ± 0.00001 and the mean POV of group 1 was 95.23 ± 0.81. The mean POV of group 2 was 0.00040 ± 0.00001, the mean postobturated volume of group 2 was 0.00038 ± 0.00001 and the mean POV of group 2 was 96.02 ± 0.10. Statistically, the insignificant difference was observed between canals obturated with zinc oxide eugenol and endoflas. Conclusion: It can be concluded that the percentage of the obturated volume of zinc oxide eugenol and endoflas were statistically insignificant.


PDF Share
  1. Bawazir OA, Salama FS. Clinical evaluation of root canal obturation methods in primary teeth. Pediatr Dent 2006;28(1):43-47.
  2. Ramar K, Mungara J. Clinical and radiographic evaluation of pulpectomies using three root canal filling materials: An in-vivo study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2010;28(1):25-29.
  3. Reuben J, Velmurugan N, et al. The evaluation of root canal morphology of the mandibular first molar in an Indian population using a spiral-computed tomography scan: An in vitro study. J Endod 2008;34:212-215.
  4. Rosendahl R, Weinert-Grodd A. Root canal treatment of primary molars with infected pulps using calcium hydroxide as a root canal filling. J Clin Pediatr Dent 1995;19:255-258.
  5. Holan G, Fuks AB. A comparison of pulpectomies using ZOE and KRI paste in primary molars: A retrospective study. Pediatr Dent 1993;15:403-407.
  6. Reddy VV. Clinical and radiological evaluation of zinc oxide eugenol and Maisto's paste as obturating materials in infected primary molars - nine months study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 1996;14:39-44.
  7. Nadkarni U, Damle SG. Comparative evaluation of calcium hydroxide and zinc oxide eugenol as root canal filling materials for primary molars. A clinical and radiographic study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2000;19:1-11.
  8. Mortazavi M, Mesbahi M. Comparison of zinc oxide eugenol and Vitapex for root canal treatment of necrotic primary teeth. Int J Paediatr Dent 2004;14:417-424.
  9. Erausquin J, Muruzabal M. Root canal fillings with zinc oxide eugenol in the rat molar. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1967;24:547-558.
  10. Barker BC, Lockett BC. Endodontic experiments with resorbable pastes. Aust Dent J 1971;16:364-372.
  11. Kennedy DB. Pediatric operative dentistry. Bristol; John Wright and Sons; 1976.
  12. Allen KR. Endodontic treatment of primary teeth. Aust Dent J 1979;24:347-351.
  13. Markowitz K, Monihan M, Liu M, Kim S. Biologic properties of eugenol and zinc oxide eugenol. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Path 1992;73:729-737.
  14. Ramar K, Mungara J. Clinical and radiographic evaluation of pulpectomies using three root canal filling materials: an in vivo study. J Ind Soc Pedodon Preven Dent 2010;28(1):25.
  15. Asokan S, Sooriaprakas C, et al. Volumetric analysis of root canal fillings in primary teeth using spiral computed tomography: an in vitro study. J Dent Child (Chic) 2012;79(2): 46-48.
  16. Rewal N, Thakur AS, Sachdev V, Mahajan N. Comparison of endoflas and zinc oxide eugenol as root canal filling materials in primary dentition. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2014;32(4):317- 321
  17. Fuks A, Eidelman E, et al. Root fillings with Endoflas in primary teeth: a retrospective study J Clin Pediatr Dent 2002;27(1): 41-46.
  18. Subramaniam P, Gilhotra K. Endoflas, zinc oxide eugenol and metapex as root canal filling materials in primary molars–a comparative clinical study. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2011; 35(4):365- 369.
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.