Effect of EDTA Preparations on Rotary Root Canal Instrumentation

• Root canal transportation was studied in vitro using x-ray micro–computed tomographic imaging and digital modeling software after canal instrumentation with rotary nickel-titanium files and either saline, EDTA 17% solution, or RC-Prep.
• The use of EDTA 17% solution did not result in more transportation than saline irrigation alone; canal preparation with RC-Prep resulted in significantly less transportation than when saline or EDTA 17% solution was used.
• Root canal volume increased significantly more when EDTA 17% solution was used during canal preparation.
• The use of chelating agents during canal instrumentation does not increase apical transportation.

IntroductionThe aim of this study was to evaluate whether rotary instrumentation using saline, EDTA 17% solution, or RC-Prep (Premier Dental, Philadelphia, PA) resulted in differences in root canal transportation. The secondary objective was to assess if instrumentation using these agents caused changes in the working length and canal volume.MethodsModerately curved mesiobuccal roots of 24 maxillary molars were standardized in length and randomized into 1 control and 2 experimental groups. The canals were instrumented with 0.04 taper rotary files to size #30. All groups were irrigated with saline. Group 1 was also irrigated using EDTA 17% solution (Pulpdent Corp, Watertown, MA), and in group 2, RC-Prep was used. X-ray micro–computed tomographic scans and working length measurements were made before and after instrumentation. Three-dimensional models were created from the pre- and postinstrumentation scan data and compared for volume changes. Centroid points were calculated in cross-sectional slices of the canals, and transportation was determined by measuring the distance between the pre- and postinstrumentation points. The data were analyzed with 1-way analysis of variance (α = 0.05) and the Tukey post hoc test.ResultsLess transportation was observed in group 2 than in group 1 (P = .001) and the control group (P = .014). Transportation in group 1 and the control group was not significantly different. Canal volume in group 1 was increased relative to group 2 (P = .004) and the control group (P = .022). No significant differences in the working length were observed.ConclusionsThe use of chelating agents during root canal instrumentation did not significantly increase apical transportation.