Using manual versus mechanized glide path instruments and ProTaper Gold versus ProTaper Next systems in curved canals: micro-CT study

Abstract The aim of this study was to evaluate the root canal shaping effect of ProTaper Gold (PTG) versus ProTaper Next (PTN) instrumentation systems, and of a manual #15 K-type file (K15) versus the ProGlider (PG) mechanized instrument for glide path creation, in severely curved mesial canals. Twe...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Breno Nappi VENTURA, Giulio GAVINI, Elaine Faga IGLECIAS, Laila Gonzales FREIRE, Celso Luiz CALDEIRA
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Sociedade Brasileira de Pesquisa Odontológica 2024-01-01
Series:Brazilian Oral Research
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1806-83242024000101100&tlng=en
_version_ 1797361167744630784
author Breno Nappi VENTURA
Giulio GAVINI
Elaine Faga IGLECIAS
Laila Gonzales FREIRE
Celso Luiz CALDEIRA
author_facet Breno Nappi VENTURA
Giulio GAVINI
Elaine Faga IGLECIAS
Laila Gonzales FREIRE
Celso Luiz CALDEIRA
author_sort Breno Nappi VENTURA
collection DOAJ
description Abstract The aim of this study was to evaluate the root canal shaping effect of ProTaper Gold (PTG) versus ProTaper Next (PTN) instrumentation systems, and of a manual #15 K-type file (K15) versus the ProGlider (PG) mechanized instrument for glide path creation, in severely curved mesial canals. Twenty-four mandibular molars with two separate mesial canals were anatomically matched using computed tomographic scanning, and then divided into two groups (n=12) according to the glide path instrument used, either K15 or PG. In all teeth, the PTG system was used to prepare the mesiobuccal canal, and the PTN, the mesiolingual canal. The teeth were scanned by computed microtomography, before and after root canal preparation, and the values of the initial volume, final volume, volumetric variation, untouched walls, and canal transportation variables were determined. The data were analyzed using the two-way ANOVA test, and the Tukey test for multiple comparisons. There was no significant difference among the study groups regarding volumetric variation or root canal transportation, either in the cervical, middle or apical thirds, or in the entire root canal (p>0.05). In the apical third, the percentage of untouched walls was significantly higher in groups using K15 than in those using PG (p<0.05), namely 33.144% and 23.285%, respectively, irrespective of the instrumentation system. In the other regions, there was no difference between K15 and PG regarding this variable. It was concluded that PG was associated with a lower rate of untouched walls in the apical region than K15.
first_indexed 2024-03-08T15:50:03Z
format Article
id doaj.art-b95bf4e74b9e40b082b9a6bcc30ee17e
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1807-3107
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-08T15:50:03Z
publishDate 2024-01-01
publisher Sociedade Brasileira de Pesquisa Odontológica
record_format Article
series Brazilian Oral Research
spelling doaj.art-b95bf4e74b9e40b082b9a6bcc30ee17e2024-01-09T07:38:59ZengSociedade Brasileira de Pesquisa OdontológicaBrazilian Oral Research1807-31072024-01-013810.1590/1807-3107bor-2024.vol38.0006Using manual versus mechanized glide path instruments and ProTaper Gold versus ProTaper Next systems in curved canals: micro-CT studyBreno Nappi VENTURAhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-4806-2393Giulio GAVINIhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-3254-2504Elaine Faga IGLECIAShttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-1350-3542Laila Gonzales FREIREhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-9552-8101Celso Luiz CALDEIRAhttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-8274-2355Abstract The aim of this study was to evaluate the root canal shaping effect of ProTaper Gold (PTG) versus ProTaper Next (PTN) instrumentation systems, and of a manual #15 K-type file (K15) versus the ProGlider (PG) mechanized instrument for glide path creation, in severely curved mesial canals. Twenty-four mandibular molars with two separate mesial canals were anatomically matched using computed tomographic scanning, and then divided into two groups (n=12) according to the glide path instrument used, either K15 or PG. In all teeth, the PTG system was used to prepare the mesiobuccal canal, and the PTN, the mesiolingual canal. The teeth were scanned by computed microtomography, before and after root canal preparation, and the values of the initial volume, final volume, volumetric variation, untouched walls, and canal transportation variables were determined. The data were analyzed using the two-way ANOVA test, and the Tukey test for multiple comparisons. There was no significant difference among the study groups regarding volumetric variation or root canal transportation, either in the cervical, middle or apical thirds, or in the entire root canal (p>0.05). In the apical third, the percentage of untouched walls was significantly higher in groups using K15 than in those using PG (p<0.05), namely 33.144% and 23.285%, respectively, irrespective of the instrumentation system. In the other regions, there was no difference between K15 and PG regarding this variable. It was concluded that PG was associated with a lower rate of untouched walls in the apical region than K15.http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1806-83242024000101100&tlng=enRoot Canal PreparationDental InstrumentsMolarX-Ray Microtomography
spellingShingle Breno Nappi VENTURA
Giulio GAVINI
Elaine Faga IGLECIAS
Laila Gonzales FREIRE
Celso Luiz CALDEIRA
Using manual versus mechanized glide path instruments and ProTaper Gold versus ProTaper Next systems in curved canals: micro-CT study
Brazilian Oral Research
Root Canal Preparation
Dental Instruments
Molar
X-Ray Microtomography
title Using manual versus mechanized glide path instruments and ProTaper Gold versus ProTaper Next systems in curved canals: micro-CT study
title_full Using manual versus mechanized glide path instruments and ProTaper Gold versus ProTaper Next systems in curved canals: micro-CT study
title_fullStr Using manual versus mechanized glide path instruments and ProTaper Gold versus ProTaper Next systems in curved canals: micro-CT study
title_full_unstemmed Using manual versus mechanized glide path instruments and ProTaper Gold versus ProTaper Next systems in curved canals: micro-CT study
title_short Using manual versus mechanized glide path instruments and ProTaper Gold versus ProTaper Next systems in curved canals: micro-CT study
title_sort using manual versus mechanized glide path instruments and protaper gold versus protaper next systems in curved canals micro ct study
topic Root Canal Preparation
Dental Instruments
Molar
X-Ray Microtomography
url http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1806-83242024000101100&tlng=en
work_keys_str_mv AT brenonappiventura usingmanualversusmechanizedglidepathinstrumentsandprotapergoldversusprotapernextsystemsincurvedcanalsmicroctstudy
AT giuliogavini usingmanualversusmechanizedglidepathinstrumentsandprotapergoldversusprotapernextsystemsincurvedcanalsmicroctstudy
AT elainefagaiglecias usingmanualversusmechanizedglidepathinstrumentsandprotapergoldversusprotapernextsystemsincurvedcanalsmicroctstudy
AT lailagonzalesfreire usingmanualversusmechanizedglidepathinstrumentsandprotapergoldversusprotapernextsystemsincurvedcanalsmicroctstudy
AT celsoluizcaldeira usingmanualversusmechanizedglidepathinstrumentsandprotapergoldversusprotapernextsystemsincurvedcanalsmicroctstudy