Comparative Evaluation of Efficacy of Obturation Techniques in Deciduous Teeth Using Cone-beam Computed Tomography: An In Vivo Study.

Introduction: Pediatric dentistry has evolved from extraction acclimatized practice to prevention and preservation. Successful endodontic treatment is mandated for retention of pulpally involved primary teeth.
Aim and Objective: To comparatively evaluate the obturation techniques namely lentulospiral and skini syringe with NaviTip in primary teeth using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT).
Materials and Methods: The study was carried out among children ranging between the ages of 4 years and 8 years of either sex with pulpal involvement of primary molars which were indicated for pulpectomy. The study population was divided into two groups according to the type of obturating technique used. Group I included samples obturated with lentulospirals while group II samples were obturated using skini syringes with NaviTip. Postoperatively, CBCT imaging was used to evaluate the quality of fill of both the obturation techniques by determining the presence of voids in the root canals.
Results: The total number of voids present in group I were 48, in which, 8 were in the coronal third, 16 in the middle third, and 24 in the apical third. On the other hand, the total number of voids present in group II was 21, out of which 7 were in the coronal third, 10 in the middle third, and 4 in the apical third. A statistically significant difference was noted between the two groups in terms of the overall voids present.
Conclusion: Within the limits imposed by the conditions used in the present study, both techniques can be used for obturation in the root canals of primary molars. Voids were observed with both the techniques, but minimum in group II, i.e., skini syringe with NaviTip.
How to Cite This Article: Nezam S, Mukherjee CG, Shukla JN, et al. Comparative Evaluation of Efficacy of Obturation Techniques in Deciduous Teeth Using Cone-beam Computed Tomography: An In Vivo Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2021;14(1):75-80.
Competing Interests: Source of support: Nil Conflict of interest: None
(Copyright © 2021; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.)