Comparative Evaluation of Three Obturating Techniques in Primary Molars: An in Vivo Study


Introduction:Pulpectomy is one of the common treatment options in primary teeth where the pulp is inflamed or become nonvital with the intension of restoring the functions of the teeth until its exfoliation. The objective of root canal obturation is to eliminate any portals of entry between the root canal and the periodontium. The complex root canal systems of primary teeth thus dictates the outcome of treatment which will affect the success of root canal therapy1. The obturating technique besides the obturating material significantly influences the success rate of the endodontic therapy. Studies have been conducted using different obturating techniques in primary teeth such as using motor driven lentulospiral, hand held lentulospiral, reamer, local anesthetic syringe with 27-gauge needle, NaviTip® system, endodontic pressure syringe, tuberculin syringe, absorbent paper point etc. 2-5 NaviTip, routinely being used in endodontics for irrigation has been proved to create less voids when used for obturating as compared to lentulospiral and other techniques2,5,6. Another variant of Navitip is Navitip Double Sideport and consists of double sideports which horizontally expresses the irrigant toward the canal walls and not into the apex as occurs in Navitip7. Thus it was decided to assess whether this benefits can be utilized for obturating primary root canals to minimize apical extrusion. This scope of Navitip Double Sideport has not yet been evaluated. The present study was designed to evaluate and compare the quality of obturation using three delivery systems in primary teeth, that is, Navitip, Navitip Double Sideport and rotary lentulospiral.