Comparative evaluation of the effect of glide path creation with Nitiflex hand K- file, Proglider and Path file on canal transportation and concentricity in apically curved canals - An In- Vitro study.
Abstract
Abstract
Aim:
To compare and evaluate the effect of glide path creation with Nitiflex hand K- file, Proglider and Path file on canal transportation and concentricity in apically curved canals.
Objectives:
To compare the degree of canal transportation and concentricity between:
1) Glide path preparation with Nitiflex hand-K file vs Proglider file followed by combination of Hyflex EDM and CM file instrumentation
2) Glide path preparation with Proglider file vs Path file followed by combination of Hyflex EDM and CM file instrumentation
3) Glide path preparation with Nitiflex hand- K file vs Path file followed by combination of Hyflex EDM and CM file instrumentation
Materials and methods:
Forty ISO 20, 0.02 taper, Endo Training Blocks (Dentsply Maillefer) were acquired and divided into following four groups (n = 10): group A, Control group without glide path preparation; group B, Glide path preparation with Nitiflex hand-K file; Group C: Glide path preparation with Proglider file; Group D: Glide path preparation with Path files. In all the groups, combination of Hyflex EDM and CM file instrumentation was done after glide path creation. Pre- and post-instrumentation digital images were processed with Image J Version 1.8.0 software to identify the center of the canal, and then superimposed using Adobe Photoshop 7.0 software. Unpaired/independent t test and One Way ANOVA were used for intergroup comparison of difference of mean scores.
Results:
In comparison to other groups, training blocks instrumented with Proglider files and a combination of Hyflex EDM and CM files had reduced deviation in canal axis.
Conclusion:
Following the combination of Hyflex EDM and CM file instrumentation with an earlier glide path created with Proglider file, canal concentricity and canal geometry are better preserved.
Key words: Glide path, canal transportation, proglider, path files, Hyflex EDM
References
2. Passi S, Kaler N, Passi N. What is a glide path?. Saint Int Dent J. 2016 March;2(2):32-37.
3. Schilder H. Cleaning and shaping the root canal. Dent Clin North Am. 1974;18:269-296.
4. West J. Endodontic update 2006. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2006;18(5):280-300.
5. Jain N, Pawar AM, Ukey PD, Jain PK, Thakur B, Gupta A. Preservation of root canal anatomy using self-adjusting file instrumentation with glide path prepared by 20/0.02 hand files versus 20/0.04 rotary files. J Conserv Dent. 2017;20(2):81-85.
6. Bergmans L, Van Cleynenbreugel J, Wevers M, Lambrechts P. Mechanical root canal preparation with NiTi rotary instruments: Rationale, performance and safety. Status report for the American Journal of Dentistry. Am J Dent. 2001;14(5):324-333
7. Berutti E, Negro AR, Lendini M, Pasqualini D. Influence of manual preflaring and torque on the failure rate of ProTaper rotary instruments. J Endod. 2004;30(6):228-230
8. Singh H, Kapoor P. Hyflex CM and EDM files: revolutionizing the art and science of endodontics. J Dent Health Oral Disord Ther. 2016;5(7):385-387.
9. Chaniotis A, Zapata RO. Present status and future directions: Management of curved and calcified root canals. Int Endod J. 2022;55(3):656–684.
10. Coleman CL, Svec TA. Analysis of Ni-Ti versus stainless steel instrumentation in resin simulated canals. J Endod. 1997;23(4):232-235.
11. Jafarzadeh H, Abbott PV. Ledge formation: Review of a great challenge in endodontics. J Endod. 2007;33(10):1155-1162
12. West JD. Endodontic predictability – “Restore or remove: How do I choose?” In: Cohen M, editor. Interdisciplinary Treatment Planning: Principles, Design, Implementation. Chicago, IL: Quintessence Publishing Co.; 2008. 123-164.
13. Weine FS, Kelly RF, Lio PJ. The effect of preparation procedures on original canal shape andon apical foramen shape. J Endod. 1975;1(8):255–262
14. Ahmad M. The validity of using simulated root canals as models for ultrasonic instrumentation. J Endod. 1989;15(11):544–547.
15. Dummer PM, Alodeh MH, al-Omari MA. A method for the construction of simulated root canals in clear resin blocks. Int Endod J. 1991 Mar;24(2):63-66.
16. Berutti E et al. Use of nickel-titanium rotary PathFile to create the glide path: comparison with manual preflaring in simulated root canals. J Endod. 2009;35(4):408–412
17. Peters OA, Paque F. Current developments in rotary root canal instrument technology and clinical use: A review. Quintessence Int. 2010;41(1):479-488.
18. Pirani C et al. HyFlex EDM: superficial features, metallurgical analysis and fatigue resistance of innovative electro discharge machined NiTi rotary instruments. Int Endod J. 2015;49(5)483–493.
19. Lim KC, Webber J. The validity of simulated root canals for the investigation of the prepared root canal shape. Int Endod J. 1985;18(4):240-246.
20. D’Amario M, Baldi M, Petricca R, Angelis FD, Abed RE, D’Arcangelo C. Evaluation of a new nickel-titanium system to create the glide path in root canal preparation of curved canals. J Endod. 2013;39(12):1581–1584.
21. Elnaghy AM, Al-Dharrab AA, Abbas HM, Elsaka SE. Evaluation of root canal transportation, centering ratio, and remaining dentin thickness of TRUShape and ProTaper Next systems in curved root canals using micro-computed tomography. Quintessence Int. 2017;48(1):27-32.
22. Capar ID, Ertas H, Arslan H. Comparison of cyclic fatigue resistance of nickel-titanium coronal flaring instruments. J Endod. 2014;40(8):1182–1185.
23. Alovisi M, Cemenasco A, Mancini L, Paolino D, Scotti N, Bianchi CC, Pasqualini D. Micro-CT evaluation of several glide path techniques and ProTaper Next shaping outcomes in maxillary first molar curved canals. Int Endod J. 2017;50(4):387–397
24. Shi L, Yang Y, Wan J, Xie W, Yang R, Yao Y. Shaping ability of rotary and reciprocating single-file systems in combination with and without different glide path techniques in simulated curved canals. J Dent Sci. 2022 Oct;17(4):1520-1527.
25. Paleker F, van der Vyver PJ. Comparison of Canal Transportation and Centering Ability of K-files, ProGlider File, and G-Files: A Micro-Computed Tomography Study of Curved Root Canals. J Endod. 2016;42(7):1105-1109.
26. Zheng L, Ji X, Li C, Zuo L, Wei X. Comparison of glide paths created with K-files, PathFiles, and the ProGlider file, and their effects on subsequent WaveOne preparation in curved canals. BMC Oral Health. 2018;18(1):152
