Glide Path Enlargement of Mandibular Molar Canals by Using K-files, the ProGlider File, and G-Files: A Comparative Study of the Preparation Times

Paleker, Farzana; Vyver, Petrus Jacobus Van der

doi:10.1016/j.joen.2016.11.025

Cited by 38 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We observed statistically significant differences regarding the same and found that the PathFile system was faster. The time taken to perform the glide path using different systems has been previously evaluated and compared (4,20,21,23). In concordance with our findings, the results of a recent research conducted by Paleker et al (20) show that the rotary files analyzed in their study (G-File and ProGlider) are faster than the manual files used to create a glide path.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

“…The time taken to perform the glide path using different systems has been previously evaluated and compared (4,20,21,23). In concordance with our findings, the results of a recent research conducted by Paleker et al (20) show that the rotary files analyzed in their study (G-File and ProGlider) are faster than the manual files used to create a glide path. Another recent study (21) compared the glide path enlargement times of the ProGlider, PathFile, X-Plorer Canal Navigation Ni-Ti files, and stainless steel K-files.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of PathFile and ProFinder systems to create a glide path in curved root canals

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Root canal shaping is as important as irrigation and filling when attempting to obtain a high success rate in endodontic treatment. The creation of a glide path before the use of rotary instruments reduces the risk of posterior iatrogenic errors. The objective of the present study was to evaluate instrumentation time and root canal transport after using 2 different glide path rotary systems. Methods:In total, 60 mesiobuccal root canals of mandibular molars, with curvature angles between 11° and 82°, were standardized to measure 15 mm. The specimens were divided into 2 groups, depending on their angles of curvature (11º-38º and 39º-82º), and further divided into 4 groups (n=15). Two groups were instrumented using the PathFile system and the other 2 using the ProFinder system. The angle and radius of curvature were measured at the most abrupt angle of curvature before and after instrumentation. Both measurements were analyzed and compared using AutoCAD software to determine canal transportation. Curvature angles were compared using Student's t test and the radii of curvature using the Wilcoxon test. The time for instrumentation was also evaluated using Student's t tests.Results: There were no statistically significant differences between the two systems with respect to root canal transport (P>0.05); however, the ProFinder system took a longer time to create a glide path (P=0.004) Conclusion: Both systems were equally effective in creating a glide path; however, the PathFile system proved to be faster than the ProFinder system.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Comparison of PathFile and ProFinder systems to create a glide path in curved root canals

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several instruments and techniques have been suggested for the preparation of glide paths, including hand preparation with stainless steel K‐files, the combination of reciprocating handpiece and stainless steel K‐files or the use of a less tapered motor‐driven nickel–titanium (NiTi) rotary instrument (Gambarini , Nakagawa et al . , Paleker & van der Vyver ). The use of NiTi rotary instruments has been associated with a less time‐consuming and safer glide path preparation that respects the original canal anatomy (Nakagawa et al .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The use of NiTi rotary instruments has been associated with a less time‐consuming and safer glide path preparation that respects the original canal anatomy (Nakagawa et al . , Paleker & van der Vyver ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Glide path preparation has been reported to guide the successor instruments and prevent complications of root canal preparation such as taper lock, instrument fracture, transportation and ledge formation (Berutti et al 2004, Patiño et al 2005. Several instruments and techniques have been suggested for the preparation of glide paths, including hand preparation with stainless steel K-files, the combination of reciprocating handpiece and stainless steel K-files or the use of a less tapered motor-driven nickel-titanium (NiTi) rotary instrument (Gambarini 2005, Nakagawa et al 2014, Paleker & van der Vyver 2017. The use of NiTi rotary instruments has been associated with a less time-consuming and safer glide path preparation that respects the original canal anatomy (Nakagawa et al 2014, Paleker & van der Vyver 2017.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Postoperative pain after glide path preparation using manual, reciprocating and continuous rotary instruments: a randomized clinical trial

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim To compare the incidence, intensity and prediction of postoperative pain after glide path preparation with manual, continuous rotary and a novel reciprocating glide path instrument. Methodology The study included 240 patients, who were treated by four specialists according to a planned treatment protocol. Following access cavity preparation and prior to glide path preparation, the subjects were randomly assigned to one of the three groups according to the glide path instrument by choosing a sealed envelope containing the group name: R‐Pilot (VDW, Munich, Germany), ProGlider (Dentsply Sirona, Ballaigues, Switzerland) and stainless steel K‐files (Dentsply Sirona; n = 80). Following glide path preparation, the teeth underwent standardized single visit root canal treatment procedures. The root canals were chemomechanically prepared using the ProTaper Next rotary system (Dentsply Sirona) under copious irrigation with 5.25% NaOCl. Final irrigation was performed with 17% EDTA and distilled water. Root fillings were placed using an epoxy resin sealer and gutta‐percha with a cold lateral compaction technique. After coronal restorations were placed, the patients were discharged with a questionnaire about the incidence and intensity of pain at 6, 12, 18, 24, 48 and 72 h postoperatively. The data were analysed using chi‐square, anova and Tukey tests and logistic regression analysis. Results The presence of preoperative pain (OR ranged between 3.5 and 14.3) and the glide path preparation techniques (OR between 2.2 and 4.1) were associated with significant effects on the incidence of postoperative pain when comparing manual versus engine‐driven glide path preparation (P < 0.05). Patients in the R‐Pilot (Mean VAS ranged between 1.57–0.21) and ProGlider (1.97–0.28) groups reported significantly less postoperative pain scores than those in the manual group (2.82–1.32; P < 0.05). There was no significant difference between R‐Pilot and ProGlider groups regarding the postoperative pain scores (P > 0.05). Conclusion Preparation of glide paths with rotating or reciprocating NiTi instruments was associated with less postoperative pain levels and incidence compared to manual glide path preparation with no significant difference between rotating and reciprocating instruments. Preoperative pain was the most significant predictor for the occurrence of postoperative pain.

show abstract

Cyclic fatigue resistance of R-Pilot, WaveOne Gold Glider, and ProGlider glide path instruments

Keskin

İnan

Demiral³

et al. 2018

Clin Oral Invest

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Glide Path Enlargement of Mandibular Molar Canals by Using K-files, the ProGlider File, and G-Files: A Comparative Study of the Preparation Times

Abstract: Glide path preparation times with the rotary instrument groups were significantly faster than with stainless steel manual K-files.

Cited by 38 publications

References 24 publications

Comparison of PathFile and ProFinder systems to create a glide path in curved root canals

Comparison of PathFile and ProFinder systems to create a glide path in curved root canals

Postoperative pain after glide path preparation using manual, reciprocating and continuous rotary instruments: a randomized clinical trial

Cyclic fatigue resistance of R-Pilot, WaveOne Gold Glider, and ProGlider glide path instruments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About