Different strategies for treating intracanal fractured instruments in a single tooth: A case report

Chai,Rong; Jiang,Xinpei; Ma,Ruixia; Zhang,Qiang; Yang,E; Zhang,Ansheng

doi:10.3892/etm.2024.12700

Different strategies for treating intracanal fractured instruments in a single tooth: A case report

Authors:
- Rong Chai
- Xinpei Jiang
- Ruixia Ma
- Qiang Zhang
- E Yang
- Ansheng Zhang
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Department of Stomatology, Xi'an International Medical Center Hospital Affiliated to Northwest University, Xi'an, Shaanxi 710077, P.R. China, Medical College, Hunan University of Chinese Medicine, Changsha, Hunan 410208, P.R. China
Published online on: August 28, 2024 https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2024.12700
Article Number: 411
Copyright: © Chai et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License.

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

A fractured instrument (FI) in the root canal is a common complication during root canal therapy. Under current medical conditions, instrument separation cannot be completely avoided because of the complex morphology of root canals and the limited surgical field and operating space of the surgeon. FIs, especially those broken in the apical third of the canal, render it difficult to completely remove infection in the root canal, where the residual infection can easily develop into reinfection. The removal of FIs is therefore the preferred option for the majority of clinicians in such cases. However, root canal preparation instruments are frequently fractured during treatment because of the complex root canal morphology, such as curvature or severe calcification, which further increases the difficulty of instrument removal. In the present case, a 41‑year‑old female patient complained of worsening pain in the left maxillary first molar for 3 days. This patient had been treated at another hospital 2 years earlier, but the discomfort persisted after treatment. Preoperative periapical radiography revealed suspected FIs at the apical third of the mesiobuccal (MB) root and the middle third of the distal buccal (DB) root, underfilling of the palatal (P) root canal and large hypodense areas surrounding the periapical region of all roots. Next, the micro‑ultrasound technique was used to remove the FI in the DB canal; a bypass through the second MB canal (MB2) was created to fill the apical stop of the MB root and the P canal was retreated. The therapeutic effect of the bypass technique was assessed by comparing bypass treatment and removal treatment for endodontic FIs. The 9‑month and 27‑month follow‑ups revealed that the periapical inflammation surrounding the DB root treated after removal of the FI and the MB root treated by bypass was significantly controlled compared with that before the operation. In addition, the present report reviewed the research progress in bypass and removal techniques, focusing on the difficulties and key points of successful root canal therapy.

View Figures

View References

1	Wycoff RC and Berzins DW: An in vitro comparison of torsional stress properties of three different rotary nickel-titanium files with a similar cross-sectional design. J Endod. 38:1118–1120. 2012.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
2	Spili P, Parashos P and Messer HH: The impact of instrument fracture on outcome of endodontic treatment. J Endod. 31:845–850. 2005.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
3	Khasnis SA, Kar PP, Kamal A and Patil JD: Rotary science and its impact on instrument separation: A focused review. J Conserv Dent. 21:116–124. 2018.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
4	Parashos P and Messer HH: Rotary NiTi instrument fracture and its consequences. J Endod. 32:1031–1043. 2006.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
5	Plotino G, Costanzo A, Grande NM, Petrovic R, Testarelli L and Gambarini G: Experimental evaluation on the influence of autoclave sterilization on the cyclic fatigue of new nickel-titanium rotary instruments. J Endod. 38:222–225. 2012.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
6	McGuigan MB, Louca C and Duncan HF: Clinical decision-making after endodontic instrument fracture. Br Dent J. 214:395–400. 2013.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
7	Madarati AA, Hunter MJ and Dummer PM: Management of intracanal separated instruments. J Endod. 39:569–581. 2013.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
8	Tikhonova S, Booij L, D'Souza V, Crosara KTB, Siqueira WL and Emami E: Investigating the association between stress, saliva and dental caries: A scoping review. BMC Oral Health. 18(41)2018.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
9	Cleghorn BM, Christie WH and Dong CC: Root and root canal morphology of the human permanent maxillary first molar: A literature review. J Endod. 32:813–821. 2006.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
10	Chhina H, Hans MK and Chander S: Ultrasonics: A novel approach for retrieval of separated instruments. J Clin Diagn Res. 9:ZD18–ZD20. 2015.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
11	Bordone A, Ciaschetti M, Perez C and Couvrechel C: Guided endodontics in the management of intracanal separated instruments: A case report. J Contemp Dent Pract. 23:853–856. 2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
12	Pradhan B, Gao Y, Gao Y, Guo T, Cao Y and He J: Broken instrument removal from mandibular first molar with conebeam computed tomography based pre-operative computer-assisted simulation: A case report. JNMA J Nepal Med Assoc. 59:795–798. 2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
13	AlRahabi MK and Ghabbani HM: Removal of a separated endodontic instrument by using the modified hollow tube-based extractor system: A case report. SAGE Open Med Case Rep. 8(2050313X20907822)2020.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
14	Monteiro JC, Kuga MC, Dantas AA, Jordao-Basso KC, Keine KC, Ruchaya PJ, Faria G and Leonardo Rde T: A method for retrieving endodontic or atypical nonendodontic separated instruments from the root canal: A report of two cases. J Contemp Dent Pract. 15:770–774. 2014.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
15	Nevares G, Cunha RS, Zuolo ML and Bueno CE: Success rates for removing or bypassing fractured instruments: A prospective clinical study. J Endod. 38:442–444. 2012.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
16	Fu M, Huang X, Zhang K and Hou B: Effects of ultrasonic removal of fractured files from the middle third of root canals on the resistance to vertical root fracture. J Endod. 45:1365–1370. 2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
17	Lea SC, Walmsley AD, Lumley PJ and Landini G: A new insight into the oscillation characteristics of endosonic files used in dentistry. Phys Med Biol. 49:2095–2102. 2004.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
18	Hindlekar A, Kaur G, Kashikar R and Kotadia P: Retrieval of separated intracanal endodontic instruments: A series of four case reports. Cureus. 15(e35694)2023.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
19	Cuje J, Bargholz C and Hulsmann M: The outcome of retained instrument removal in a specialist practice. Int Endod J. 43:545–554. 2010.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
20	Madarati AA, Qualtrough AJ and Watts DC: Factors affecting temperature rise on the external root surface during ultrasonic retrieval of intracanal separated files. J Endod. 34:1089–1092. 2008.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
21	Hashem AA: Ultrasonic vibration: Temperature rise on external root surface during broken instrument removal. J Endod. 33:1070–1073. 2007.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
22	Sjogren U, Figdor D, Persson S and Sundqvist G: Influence of infection at the time of root filling on the outcome of endodontic treatment of teeth with apical periodontitis. Int Endod J. 30:297–306. 1997.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
23	Arshadifar E, Shahabinejad H, Fereidooni R, Shahravan A and Kamyabi H: Possibility of bypassing three fractured rotary NiTi files and its correlation with the degree of root canal curvature and location of the fractured file: An in vitro study. Iran Endod J. 17:62–66. 2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
24	Kalogeropoulos K, Xiropotamou A, Koletsi D and Tzanetakis GN: The effect of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) evaluation on treatment planning after endodontic instrument fracture. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 19(4088)2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
25	Sinha S, Barua AND, Rana KS, Singh K, Kumar S and Saini R: Comparison of efficacy of various intracanal irrigants with ultrasonic bypass system. J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 13 (Suppl 2):S1390–S1393. 2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
26	Liu J, Watanabe S, Mochizuki S, Kouno A and Okiji T: Comparison of vapor bubble kinetics and cleaning efficacy of different root canal irrigation techniques in the apical area beyond the fractured instrument. J Dent Sci. 18:1141–1147. 2023.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
27	Vadachkoria O, Mamaladze M, Jalabadze N, Chumburidze T and Vadachkoria D: Evaluation of three obturation techniques in the apical part of root canal. Georgian Med News. 17-21:2019.PubMed/NCBI
28	Ho ES, Chang JW and Cheung GS: Quality of root canal fillings using three gutta-percha obturation techniques. Restor Dent Endod. 41:22–28. 2016.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar