Shaping ability of WaveOne Gold reciprocating instruments compared to two analogous counterparts
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17159/2519-0105/2022/v77no1a2Keywords:
Coronal and midroot levelsAbstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare canalcentering ability and transportation of three analogous reciprocating shaping instruments after glide path preparation. Radiographs were used to select sixty untreated mesiobuccal canals with curvatures of 25° to 35° from extracted, human, mandibular molars. The canals were randomly divided into three groups for glide path preparation and shaping (n = 20): Group TWOG (WaveOne Gold Glider + Primary WaveOne Gold); Group TEF (Edge GlidePath + Primary EdgeOne
Fire); and Group TOFG (One File G Reciprocating Glide Path File + Primary Shaping file). Pre- and post-preparation micro-CT scans were compared at levels 7 mm (coronal), 5 mm (midroot), and 3 mm (apical) from the apex to evaluate transportation and centering ratios.
There were no significant differences in centering ratios at the coronal and midroot levels (P > 0.05). Transportation values were similar at the coronal level and for the combined mean values (P > 0.05). Transportation values for TEF and TWOG were similar (P = 0.98) at the midroot level but significantly lower than TOFG (P = 0.04). Apically, TEF remained significantly more centered with significantly lower transportation values than TWOG and TOFG (P < 0.05). Combined results showed that TEF was significantly more
centered than TWOG but similar to TOFG (P = 0.017). Centering ratios and transportation values were more favorable in the apical region after use of TEF. All three groups evaluated in this study proved to be safe for the preparation of moderately curved root canals.
Downloads
References
Peters OA, Laib A, Göhring TN, et al. Changes in root canal geometry after preparation assessed by high-resolution computed tomography. J Endod 2001;27(1):1–6. Doi: 10.1097/00004770-200101000- 00001.
Versiani MA, Leoni GB, Steier L, et al. Micro-computed tomography study of oval-shaped canals prepared with the self-adjusting file, Reciproc, WaveOne, and ProTaper universal systems. J Endod 2013;39(8):1060–6. Doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2013.04.009. Epub 2013 May 22. PMID: 23880278.
Van der Vyver PJ, Paleker F, Vorster M, et al. Root canal shaping using nickel titanium, M-Wire, and Gold Wire: a micro–computed tomographic comparative study of One Shape, ProTaper Next, and WaveOne Gold instruments in maxillary first molars. J Endod 2019;45(1):62–7. Doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2018.09.013.
Paqué F, Ganahl D, Peters OA. Effects of root canal preparation on apical geometry assessed by microcomputed tomography. J Endod 2009;35(7):1056–9.
Plotino G, Mohamed H, Ahmed A, et al. Current assessment of reciprocation in endodontic preparation: A comprehensive review — Part II: properties and effectiveness. J Endod 2015;41:1939–50.
Franco V, Fabiani C, Taschieri S, et al. Investigation on the shaping ability of nickel–titanium files when used with a reciprocating motion. J Endod 2011;37:1398–401.
Giuliani V, Di Nasso L, Pace R, et al. Shaping ability of WaveOne primary reciprocating files and ProTaper system used in continuous and reciprocating motion. J Endod 2014;40(9):1468–71.
Tambe VH, Nagmode PS, Abraham S, et al. Comparison of canal transportation and centering ability of rotary protaper, one shape system and wave one system using cone beam computed tomography: an in vitro study. J Conserv Dent 2014;17:561–5.
Saber SE, Nagy MM, Schäfer E. Comparative evaluation of the shaping ability of WaveOne, Reciproc and OneShape single-file systems in severely curved root canals of extracted teeth. Int Endod J 2015;48:109–14.
EdgeEndo. EdgeGlidePath. Available at: https://www. edgeendo.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/DFUEdgeGlidePath.pdf. Accessed October 15, 2019, 2016.
Tomer AK, Miglani A, Sahni S, et al. Comparison of efficacy of three Ni-Ti instruments in removal of guttapercha from root canal during retreatment- an in vitro study. IOSR J Dent Med Sci 2017;16:32–7.
PacDent. One File G Reciprocating File. Available at: https://pac-dent.com/collections/files/products/onefile-g-reciprocating-file. Accessed October 21, 2019, 2018.
Glossary of endodontic terms: American Association of 16 > RESEARCH www.sada.co.za / SADJ Vol. 77 No. 1 Endodontists 9th Edn. Chicarho, American Association of Endodontists.2016. Available at http://www.aae.org/ speciality/clinical-resources/glossary-endodontic-terms/
Gambill JM, Alder M, Carlos E. Comparison of nickeltitanium and stainless steel hand-file instrumentation using computed tomography. J Endod. 1996;22(7):369- 75.
Schneider SW. A comparison of canal preparations in straight and curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral
Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1971;32:271–5.
Urbaniak GC, Pious S. Research Randomizer. Social Psychology Network. Available at: http://www.randomizer.org/form.htm% 5Cnhttp://www.randomizer.org/ 2011.
De Oliveira Alves V, Da Silveira Bueno CE, Cunha RS, et al. Comparison among manual instruments and pathfile and mtwo rotary instruments to create a glide path in the root canal preparation of curved canals. J Endod 2012;38(1):117–20. Doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2011.10.001.
Elnaghy AM, Elsaka SE. Evaluation of root canal transportation, centering ratio, and remaining dentin thickness associated with Protaper NEXT instruments with and without glide path. J Endod 2014;40:2053–6.
Yamamura B, Cox T, Heddaya B, et al. Comparing canal transportation and centering ability of endosequence and vortex rotary files by using microcomputed tomography. J Endod 2012;38(8):1121–5. Doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2012.04.019.
Hashem AAR, Ghoneim AG, Lutfy RA, et al. Geometric analysis of root canals prepared by four rotary NiTi shaping systems. J Endod 2012;38(7):996–1000.
Shen Y, Zhou HM, Zheng YF, et al. Metallurgical characterization of controlled memory wire nickeltitanium rotary instruments. J Endod 2011;37:1566– 71.
Capar ID, Ertas H, Ok E, et al. Comparative study of different novel nickel-titanium rotary systems for root canal preparation in severely curved root canals. J Endod 2014;40(6):852–6.
Zhao D, Shen Y, Peng B, et al. Micro-computed tomography evaluation of the preparation of mesiobuccal root canals in maxillary first molars with Hyflex CM, Twisted Files, and K3 instruments. J Endod 2013;39(3):385–8. Doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2012.11.030.
Plotino G, Nagendrababu V, Bukiet F, et al. Influence of negotiation, glide path, and preflaring procedures on root canal shaping—terminology, basic concepts, and a systematic review. J Endod 2020;46(6):707–29. Doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2020.01.023.
Gambarini G, Di Nardo D, Galli M, et al. Differences in cyclic fatigue lifespan between two different heat treated NiTi endodontic rotary instruments: WaveOne Gold vs EdgeOne Fire. J Clin Exp Dent 2019;11(7):e609–13. Doi: 10.4317/jced.55839.
Lee JY, Kwak SW, Ha JH, et al. Mechanical properties of various glide path preparation nickel-titanium rotary instruments. J Endod 2019;45(2):199–204. Doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2018.10.017.
Hasheminia SM, Farhad A, Sheikhi M, et al. Conebeam computed tomographic analysis of canal transportation and centering ability of single-file systems. J Endod 2018;44(12):1788–91. Doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2018.09.011.
Berutti E, Paolino DS, Chiandussi G, et al. Root canal anatomy preservation of WaveOne reciprocating files with or without glide path. J Endod 2012;38(1):101–4.
Goo HJ, Kwak SW, Ha JH, et al. Mechanical properties of various heat-treated nickel-titanium rotary instruments. J Endod 2017;43(11):1872–7. Doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2017.05.025.
Peters OA. Current challenges and concepts in the preparation of root canal systems: a review. J Endod 2004;30:559–67.
Pinheiro SR, Alcalde MP, Vivacqua-Gomes N, et al. Evaluation of apical transportation and centering ability of five thermally treated NiTi rotary systems. Int Endod J 2018;51(6):705–13. Doi: 10.1111/iej.12881.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
.png){kind=spacer}