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
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have