Download PDF
CC BY 4.0 · Journal of Health and Allied Sciences NU 2023; 13(02): 168-171
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1753492
Review Article

Impact of a Retained Instrument on Treatment Outcome: A Systematic Review

Lakshmi Nidhi Rao
1   Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, ABSMIDS, Nitte (Deemed to be University), Mangalore, Karnataka, India
,
Sembaga Lakshmi Thirunarayanan
1   Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, ABSMIDS, Nitte (Deemed to be University), Mangalore, Karnataka, India
,
Aditya Shetty
1   Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, ABSMIDS, Nitte (Deemed to be University), Mangalore, Karnataka, India
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Instrument separation during endodontic therapy is a frequent accident with rotary instruments being more likely to separate than manual ones. There are various treatment options when the instrument separates in a canal depending on the location, complexity of the canal anatomy, and the operators' ability. The success of the tooth that has a retained fragment of instrument in the canal has been assessed in various studies but no clear conclusion has been drawn. The goal of this systematic review is to answer as many questions as possible. Does the retention of a separated instrument, compared with no retained separated instrument, result in a worse clinical outcome in adult patients who have received nonsurgical root canal treatment?

Materials and Methodology The search was conducted with the boolean terms in various database following the PRISMA guidelines. The inclusion and exclusion criteria were set for the inclusion of the study for the systematic review.

Results Out of the 330 articles that were obtained, 28 were duplicates. After screening for eligibility, only 7 articles were retrieved for full text. When inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied, none of the studies could be included.

Conclusion There is still a lack of consensus on the treatment option for a separated instrument and there is no clear evidence to suggest whether the prognosis of the tooth with retained instrument is reduced or not.

Keywords

separated instruments - outcome assessment - endodontics - systematic review - retained instrument


Publication History

Article published online:
08 August 2022

© 2022. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Torabinejad M, Lemon RR. Procedural accidents. In: Walton R, Torabinejad M. eds. Principles and practice of endodontics. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company; 2002: 310-330
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 2 Rambabu T. Management of fractured endodontic instruments in root canal: a review. J Sci Dent. 2014; 4 (02) 40-48
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 3 Serene TP, Adams JD, Saxena A. Nickel-titanium instruments. Applications in endodontics. St. Louis, MO: Ishiyaku EuroAmerica, Inc.,; 1995
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 4 Otsuka K, Wayman CM. Shape Memory Alloys. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1998
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 5 Sattapan B, Nervo GJ, Palamara JEA, Messer HH. Defects in rotary nickel-titanium files after clinical use. J Endod 2000; 26 (03) 161-165
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Simon S, Machtou P, Tomson P, Adams N, Lumley P. Influence of fractured instruments on the success rate of endodontic treatment. Dent Update 2008; 35 (03) 172-174 , 176, 178–179
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Gabel WP, Hoen M, Steiman HR, Pink FE, Dietz R. Effect of rotational speed on nickel-titanium file distortion. J Endod 1999; 25 (11) 752-754
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Yared GM, Bou Dagher FE, Machtou P. Cyclic fatigue of ProFile rotary instruments after clinical use. Int Endod J 2000; 33 (03) 204-207
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Parashos P, Gordon I, Messer HH. Factors influencing defects of rotary nickel-titanium endodontic instruments after clinical use. J Endod 2004; 30 (10) 722-725
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Engström B, Hård L, Segerstad AF, Ramström G, Frostell G. Correlation of positive cultures with the prognosis for root canal treatment. Odontol Revy 1964; 15: 257-270
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 11 Engström B, Lundberg M. The correlation between positive culture and the prognosis of root canal therapy after pulpectomy. Odontol Revy 1965; 16 (03) 193-203
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Tordai B, Schreindorfer K, Lempel E, Krajczár K. Factors affecting ultrasonic removal of separated endodontic instruments: A retrospective clinical study. Quintessence Int 2018; 49 (04) 257-266
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Farid H, Khan FR, Rahman M. ProTaper rotary instrument fracture during root canal preparation: a comparison between rotary and hybrid techniques. Oral Health Dent Manag 2013; 12 (01) 50-55
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Shahabinejad H, Ghassemi A, Pishbin L, Shahravan A. Success of ultrasonic technique in removing fractured rotary nickel-titanium endodontic instruments from root canals and its effect on the required force for root fracture. J Endod 2013; 39 (06) 824-828
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Madarati AA, Qualtrough AJ, Watts DC. Effect of retained fractured instruments on tooth resistance to vertical fracture with or without attempt at removal. Int Endod J 2010; 43 (11) 1047-1053
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Mohammadi Z, Khademi AA. Effect of a separated rotary instrument on bacterial penetration of obturated root canals. J Clin Dent 2006; 17 (05) 131-133
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Cunha RS, Junaid A, Ensinas P, Nudera W, Bueno CE. Assessment of the separation incidence of reciprocating WaveOne files: a prospective clinical study. J Endod 2014; 40 (07) 922-924
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Tygesen YA, Steiman HR, Ciavarro C. Comparison of distortion and separation utilizing profile and Pow-R nickel-titanium rotary files. J Endod 2001; 27 (12) 762-764
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Siqueira Jr JF. Aetiology of root canal treatment failure: why well-treated teeth can fail. Int Endod J 2001; 34 (01) 1-10
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Vouzara T, , el Chares M, Lyroudia K. Separated instrument in endodontics: frequency, treatment and prognosis. Balkan Journal of Dental Medicine. 2018; 22 (03) 123-132
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Murad M, Murray C. Impact of retained separated endodontic instruments during root canal treatment on clinical outcomes remains uncertain. J Evid Based Dent Pract 2011; 11 (02) 87-88
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Miccoli G, Seracchiani M, Zanza A, Giudice AD, Testarelli L. Possible Complications of Endodontic Treatments. J Contemp Dent Pract 2020; 21 (05) 473-474
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar