In Vitro Transportation of Curved Canals Following Glide Path Preparation by PathFile and Scout RaCe Rotary Systems Versus Manual Instrumentation Using Cone-Beam Computed Tomography

  • Sareh Aflaki Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Qazvin University of Medical Sciences, Qazvin, Iran
  • Elham Boyerahmadi Student Research Committee, Qazvin University of Medical Sciences, Qazvin, Iran
  • Amir Talaei Student Research Committee, Qazvin University of Medical Sciences, Qazvin, Iran
  • Mohammad Raouf Safari Student Research Committee, Qazvin University of Medical Sciences, Qazvin, Iran
  • Mahdis Mohammadpour Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Qazvin University of Medical Sciences, Qazvin, Iran
  • Navid Mohammadi ORCID Department of Community and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Qazvin University of Medical Sciences, Qazvin, Iran
  • Mamak Adel ORCID Mail Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Qazvin University of Medical Sciences, Qazvin, Iran AND Dental Caries Prevention Research Center, Qazvin University of Medical Sciences, Qazvin, Iran
Keywords:
Cone-Beam Computed Tomography, Dental Instruments, Equipment Design, Root Canal Preparation, Stainless Steel, Nickel, Titanium

Abstract

Objectives: This study aimed to assess root canal transportation of curved canals following glide path preparation by PathFile and Scout RaCe rotary systems compared with manual instrumentation with stainless steel (SS) hand files using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT).
Materials and Methods: This in-vitro experimental study was conducted on extracted human mandibular first and second molars (n=51) with 25-45° canal curvature in their mesiobuccal root. All teeth underwent CBCT and were randomly divided into three groups (n=17). In group 1, a glide path in the mesiobuccal canal was created using SS hand files to the working length. In groups 2 and 3, after canal negotiation with a #8 SS hand file, a glide path was created with PathFile and Scout RaCe systems, respectively. The teeth underwent CBCT. Pre- and postoperative CBCT scans were compared to calculate the magnitude of canal transportation at 3, 6, and 9 mm from the apex. The results were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis and Freedman tests (P<0.05).
Results: Manual instrumentation caused significantly higher canal transportation at 3 and 9 mm from the apex compared with rotary systems (P<0.05). PathFile and Scout RaCe were not significantly different at 3 (P=0.39) or 9 mm (P=0.99). No significant difference was noted in canal transportation among the three groups at 6 mm (P=0.15).
Conclusion: Scout RaCe and PathFile cause less canal transportation than manual instrumentation with SS files when used for glide path preparation in curved canals, especially in the apical third.

References

1. Ajuz NC, Armada L, Gonçalves LS, Debelian G, Siqueira JF Jr. Glide path preparation in S-shaped canals with rotary pathfinding nickel-titanium instruments. J Endod. 2013 Apr;39(4):534-7.
2. Gergi R, Rjeily JA, Sader J, Naaman A. Comparison of canal transportation and centering ability of twisted files, Pathfile-ProTaper system, and stainless steel hand K-files by using computed tomography. J Endod. 2010 May;36(5):904-7.
3. Meireles DA, Marques AA, Garcia LF, Garrido AD, Sponchiado EC. Assessment of apical deviation of root canals after debridement with the Hybrid, ProTaper and PathFile systems. J Interdiscip Dent. 2012 Jan;2(1):20-4.
4. Jafarzadeh H, Abbott PV. Ledge formation: review of a great challenge in endodontics. J Endod. 2007 Oct;33(10):1155-62.
5. Berutti E, Paolino DS, Chiandussi G, Alovisi M, Cantatore G, Castellucci A, et al. Root canal anatomy preservation of WaveOne reciprocating files with or without glide path. J Endod. 2012 Jan;38(1):101-4.
6. Patiño PV, Biedma BM, Liébana CR, Cantatore G, Bahillo JG. The influence of a manual glide path on the separation rate of NiTi rotary instruments. J Endod. 2005 Feb;31(2):114-6.
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 Apr;30(4):228-30.
8. Roland DD, Andelin WE, Browning DF, Hsu GH, Torabinejad M. The effect of preflaring on the rates of separation for 0.04 taper nickel titanium rotary instruments. J Endod. 2002 Jul;28(7):543-5.
9. Berutti E, Cantatore G, Castellucci A, Chiandussi G, Pera F, Migliaretti G, et al. Use of nickel-titanium rotary PathFile to create the glide path: comparison with manual preflaring in simulated root canals. J Endod. 2009 Mar;35(3):408-12.
10. Peters OA, Koka RS. Preparation of coronal and radicular spaces. In: Ingle JI, Bakland LK, Baumgartner JC, editors. Ingles endodontics. 6th ed. Hamilton, Canada: BC Deckers, 2008:877-991.
11. Pasqualini D, Mollo L, Scotti N, Cantatore G, Castellucci A, Migliaretti G, et al. Postoperative pain after manual and mechanical glide path: a randomized clinical trial. J Endod. 2012 Jan;38(1):32-6.
12. Alves Vde O, Bueno CE, Cunha RS, Pinheiro SL, Fontana CE, de Martin AS. Comparison among manual instruments and PathFile and Mtwo rotary instruments to create a glide path in the root canal preparation of curved canals. J Endod. 2012 Jan;38(1):117-20.
13. Vorster M, van der Vyver PJ, Paleker F. Canal Transportation and Centering Ability of WaveOne Gold in Combination with and without Different Glide Path Techniques. J Endod. 2018 Sep;44(9):1430-1435.
14. D'Amario M, Baldi M, Petricca R, De Angelis F, El Abed R, 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 Dec;39(12):1581-4.
15. Nazarimoghadam K, Labbaf H, Kavosi A. Negotiation, Centering Ability and Transportation of Three Glide Path Files in Second Mesiobuccal Canals of Maxillary Molars: A CBCT Assessment. Iran Endod J. 2019 Jan;14(1):47-51.
16. Durack C, Patel S. Cone beam computed tomography in endodontics. Braz Dent J. 2012;23(3):179-91.
17. Schneider SW. A comparison of canal preparations in straight and curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1971 Aug;32(2):271-5.
18. Gambill JM, Alder M, del Rio CE. Comparison of nickel-titanium and stainless steel hand-file instrumentation using computed tomography. J Endod. 1996 Jul;22(7):369-75.
19. Schilder H. Cleaning and shaping the root canal. Dent Clin North Am. 1974 Apr;18(2):269-96.
20. Hülsmann M, Stryga F. Comparison of root canal preparation using different automated devices and hand instrumentation. J Endod. 1993 Mar;19(3):141-5.
21. Madani ZS, Haddadi A, Haghanifar S, Bijani A. Cone-beam computed tomography for evaluation of apical transportation in root canals prepared by two rotary systems. Iran Endod J. 2014 Spring;9(2):109-12.
22. Alves RA, Souza JB, Gonçalves Alencar AH, Pécora JD, Estrela C. Detection of Procedural Errors with Stainless Steel and NiTi Instruments by Undergraduate Students Using Conventional Radiograph and Cone Beam Computed Tomography. Iran Endod J. 2013 Fall;8(4):160-5.
23. 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 Aug;18(1):152.
24. Peters OA. Current challenges and concepts in the preparation of root canal systems: a review. J Endod. 2004 Aug;30(8):559-67.
25. Hartmann MS, Barletta FB, Camargo Fontanella VR, Vanni JR. Canal transportation after root canal instrumentation: a comparative study with computed tomography. J Endod. 2007 Aug;33(8):962-5.
26. Lopes HP, Elias CN, Siqueira JF Jr, Soares RG, Souza LC, Oliveira JC, et al. Mechanical behavior of pathfinding endodontic instruments. J Endod. 2012 Oct;38(10):1417-21.
Published
2020-11-23
How to Cite
1.
Aflaki S, Boyerahmadi E, Talaei A, Safari MR, Mohammadpour M, Mohammadi N, Adel M. In Vitro Transportation of Curved Canals Following Glide Path Preparation by PathFile and Scout RaCe Rotary Systems Versus Manual Instrumentation Using Cone-Beam Computed Tomography. Front Dent. 17.
QRcode
Section
Original Article