Comparison of forward and reverse single-file reciprocation for root canal instrumentation in curved mandibular molar canals - a Micro-CT analysis

Keywords: centering ability, ProTaper Next, reciprocation, transportation, WaveOne Gold

Abstract

To compare (i) canal centering ability and transportation of Primary WaveOne Gold in combination with WaveOne Gold Glider with ProTaper Next X2 in combination with ProGlider using Micro-CT, and (ii) difference in final preparation times between these two preparation groups. Mesiobuccal canals of 50 mandibular first molars were used. Teeth were randomly divided into two preparation groups. Results were analysed using a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). Apically, ProGlider/ProTaper Next X2 demonstrated better centering ratio values and lower transportation values compared to WaveOne Gold Glider/Primary WaveOne Gold (p<.05). No differences were found in the mean combined centering ratios and transportation values between groups (p>.05). No statistically significant differences between the canal preparation times were found (p<.06). The combination of ProGlider /ProTaper Next X2 yields better results for transportation and centering ability apically compared to WaveOne Gold Glider in combination with Primary Wave-One Gold.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Martin-Biedma B, Zelada G, Varela-Patino P, et al. Factors influencing the fracture of nickel-titanium rotary instruments. Int Endod J. 2003; 36: 262-6.

Cheung GS, Liu CS. A retrospective study of endo-dontic treatment outcome between nickel-titanium rotary and stainless steel hand filing techniques. J Endod. 2009; 35: 938-43.

Yared G. Canal preparation using only one Ni-Ti rotary instrument: preliminary observations. Int Endod J. 2008; 41: 339-44.

Webber J. Shaping canals with confidence: WaveOne GOLD single-file. Roots. 2015; 1: 34-40.

Grande NM, Ahmed HMA, Cohen S, et al. Current assessment of reciprocation in endodontic preparation: A comprehensive review - Part I: Historic perspectives and current applications. J Endod. 2015; 41(11): 1778-83.

Gagliardi J, Versiani M, De Sousa-Neto MD, et al. Evaluation of the shaping characteristics of ProTaper Gold, ProTaper NEXT, and ProTaper Universal in curved canals. J Endod. 2015; 41(10): 1718-24.

Van Der Vyver PJ, Scianamblo MJ. Clinical guidelines for the use of ProTaper Next instruments (part I). Dental Tribune. 2014; 7: 12-6.

Rhodes JS, Pitt Ford TR, Lynch PJ, et al. Micro-computed tomograpy: a new tool for experimental endodontology. Int Endod J. 1999; 32: 165-70.

Gavini G, Caldeira CL, Akisue E, et al. Resistance to flexu-ral fatigue of Reciproc R25 files under continuous rotation and reciprocating movement. J Endod. 2012; 38(5): 5-8.

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.

De-Deus G, Moreira E, Lopes H, Elias C. Extended cyclic fatigue life of F2 ProTaper instruments used in reciprocating movement. Int Endod J. 2010; 43(12): 1063-8.

You SY, Bae KS, Baek SH, et al. Lifespan of one nickel-titanium rotary file with reciprocating motion in curved root canals. J Endod. 2010; 36(12): 1991-4.

Varela-Patino P, Ibanez-Párraga A, Rivas-Mundina B, et al. Alternating versus continuous rotation: a comparative study of the effect on instrument life. J Endod. 2010; 36(1): 157-9.

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.

Hoffman JW, De Beer. Characteristics of the micro-Focus x-ray tomography facility (MIXRAD) at NECSA in South Africa. 18th World Conf. Nondestruct. Test. Durban, South Africa; 2012.

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.

Gambill JM, Alder M, del Rio CE. Comparison of nickel-titanium and stainless steel hand-file instrumentation using computed tomography. J Endod. 1996; 22: 369-75.

Gergi R, Rjeily JA, Sader J, et al. Comparison of canal transportation and centering ability of twisted files, Path-file-ProTaper system, and stainless steel hand K-files by using computed tomography. J Endod. 2010; 36: 904-7.

Short JA, Morgan LA, Baumgartner JC. A comparison of canal centering ability of four instrumentation techniques. J Endod. 1997; 23: 503-7.

Tripi TR, Bonaccorso A, Condorelli GG. Cyclic fatigue of different nickel-titanium endodontic rotary instruments. Oral Surg, Oral Med, Oral Pathol, Oral Radiol Endod 2006; 102: 106-14.

Turpin YL, Chagneau F, Vulcain JM. Impact of two theoretical cross-sections on torsional and bending stresses of nickel-titanium root canal instrument models. J Endod. 2000; 26: 414-7.

Uygun AD, Kol E, Topcu MKC, et al. Variations in cyclic fatigue resistance among ProTaper Gold, ProTaper Next and ProTaper Universal instruments at different levels. Int Endod J. 2016; 49: 494-9.

Özyürek T, Yilmaz K, Uslu G. Shaping ability of Reciproc, WaveOne GOLD , and HyFlex EDM single-file systems in simulated S-shaped canals. J Endod. 2017; 43: 805-9.

Ruddle CJ, Machtou P, West JD. The shaping movement: Fifth generation technology. Dent Today. 2013; 32: 94, 96-9.

Van der Vyver PJ. Management of an upper first molar with three mesiobuccal root canals. Endod Pract. 2013; 8: 21-5.

Espir CG, Nascimento-Mendes CA, Guerreiro-Tanomaru JM, et al. Counterclockwise or clockwise reciprocating motion for oval root canal preparation: a Micro-CT analysis. Int Endod J. 2018; 51: 541-8.

Fidler Ales. Kinematics of 2 reciprocating endodontic motors: The difference between actual and set values. J Endod 2014; 40(7): 990-4.

Plotino G, Grande NM, Testarelli L, et al. Cyclic fatigue of Reciproc and Wave-One reciprocating instruments. Int Endod J. 2012; 45: 614-8.

Paque F, Zehnder M, De-Deus G. Microtomography-based comparison of reciprocating single-file F2 ProTaper technique versus rotary full sequence. J Endod. 2011; 37: 1394-7.

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.

Published
2020-05-31
How to Cite
Van der Vyver, P. J., Vorster, M., Paleker, F., & Vally, Z. I. (2020). Comparison of forward and reverse single-file reciprocation for root canal instrumentation in curved mandibular molar canals - a Micro-CT analysis. South African Dental Journal, 75(4), 183-188. https://doi.org/10.17159/2519-0105/2020/v75no4a2