Shaping ability of rotary and reciprocating single-file systems in combination with and without different glide path techniques in simulated curved canals

Abstract

Background/purposeGlide path management (GPM) is a consequential clinical step that serves to influence predictably successful root canal therapy. However, the effect of GPM on the shaping ability of single-file system remains controversial. This study compared the performance of rotary single-file One Curve (OC) and reciprocating single-file Reciproc Blue (RCB) in combination with/without different glide path techniques: no glide path preparation (NG), PathFile (PF), ProGlider (PG) and WaveOne Gold Glider (WOGG), respectively. Materials and methods80 simulated curved canals (n = 10 canals/per group) were instrumented to an apical size of 0.25 mm using OC and RCB in combination with/without different glide path techniques, respectively. The amount of resin removal, canal transportation, and the degree of canal straightening were measured in Photoshop CS6 software. Statistical analysis of the data was performed by using Kruskal–Wallis test, followed by Dunn's post hoc test with Bonferroni correction (α = 0.05). ResultsPost–glide path analysis found that WOGG and PG produced less canal transportation and curvature straightening than PF (P < 0.05). Post-shaping analysis showed that OC groups removed significantly less resin than RCB groups (P < 0.05). The PG and WOGG subgroups in both OC groups and RCB groups produced less transportation and curvature straightening than NG and PF subgroups (P < 0.05). OC + PG subgroup and OC + WOGG subgroup yielded the least canal transportation and curvature straightening (P < 0.05). ConclusionPG and WOGG can improve the shaping ability of OC and RCB instrument. OC, especially when combined with PG and WOGG, has a less aggressive dentin cutting and more centered preparation than the RCB instrument.