Comparison of Shaping Ability of Different Single-File Systems Using Microcomputed Tomography

Abstract

Objectives To evaluate the shaping ability of four different single-file systems using micro-computed tomography (micro-CT). Materials and Methods Eighty mesiobuccal and mesiolingual canals of permanent mandibular molars were randomly assigned to four groups according to the file used; WaveOne Gold, RECIPROC Blue, HyFlex EDM, and One Shape (n = 20). The samples were scanned using micro-CT for the preinstrumentation record; then the canals were instrumented and scanned for the postinstrumentation records. Statistical Analysis The data were then analyzed statistically using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with the level of significance set at α = 0.05. Results The results of canal centering ratio and canal transportation showed that no significant difference was found among the four file groups at the middle and the coronal levels. However, a significant difference was found at the apical level (p < 0.05), where WaveOne Gold showed the best centering ratio and the least amount of canal transportation. The change in the canal volume was significant at the coronal level (p < 0.05), whereas the change in the canal volume was higher for the HyFlex EDM group than the other groups. No significant difference was found between the other groups at the apical level, middle level, or in the total percentage of canal volume. Conclusion WaveOne Gold produced a more centralized canal preparation with a lesser amount of transportation at the apical level. HyFlex EDM showed the highest canal volumetric change at the coronal level. The interim design of the endodontic files has a high impact on the behavior of the file inside the root canal.

Cutting efficiency of ProDesign R, Reciproc Blue and WaveOne Gold reciprocating instruments

“…Similar to this study, Keskin et al 2018 compared WOG and RECB using simulated curved canals of resin blocks but with different results: WOG showed the best performance regarding canal centering ratio and the amount of canal transportation at the apical level suggesting that the file characteristics such as the surface treatment, cross-sectional design or the taper have more influence on the file performance rather than the motion kinematics (Elashiry et al 2020). Modifications on cross-section design, surface treatment, and manufacturing processes have been proposed for enhancing the cutting efficiency and fatigue resistance of NiTi rotary instruments (De Deus et al 2017).…”

“…The crosssection configuration of each instrument 5 mm from the tip showed the smallest area to PDR followed by RECB and WOG. At 3 mm PDR showed the smallest area followed by WOG and RECB (Elashiry et al 2020).…”

“…Among different evaluation methods, weight loss gives the most reliable quantitative measurement (Vinothkumar et al 2007). Several studies comparing the cutting efficiency of reciprocating systems reported similar results, regardless of the cross-sectional design, taper, and alloy (Plotino et al 2014, Elashiry et al 2020, Haikel et al 2017, Wan et al 2010, Schafer et al 2008, Burklein et al 2013, Vinothkumar et al 2007. The observation that instruments with S-shape cross-section were associated with an enhanced cutting efficiency (Plotino et al 2014, Schafer eta al.…”

Comparison of Canal Transportation and Centering Ability of ProGlider and WaveOne Gold Glider in Curved Canals

“…3,16 The micro-CT method has been accepted as an important scientific instrument for assessing the efficiency of shaping methods of various file systems, and its repeatability and accuracy have been proven in several studies. 2,5,19,24,25 In this study, four levels were chosen for the analysis of root canal transport and centralization: 1, 3, 5, and 7 mm from the foramen. 26 These measurements represent the foraminal, apical, middle, and coronal third segments of the root, which usually have canal curvatures resulting in a high vulnerability to iatrogenic accidents.…”

“… 3 16 The micro-CT method has been accepted as an important scientific instrument for assessing the efficiency of shaping methods of various file systems, and its repeatability and accuracy have been proven in several studies. 2 5 19 24 25 …”