Cargando…

Comparison of PathFile and ProFinder Systems to Create a Glide Path in Curved Root Canals

OBJECTIVE: Root canal shaping is as important as irrigation and filling when attempting to obtain a high success rate in endodontic treatment. The creation of a glide path before the use of rotary instruments reduces the risk of posterior iatrogenic errors. The objective of the present study was to...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Alfayate, Ruth Pérez, Mercade, Montse, Rojas, Jorge Vera, Luaña, Roberto Estévez, Pereda, Ana Antoranz, Algar, Juan, Cabello, Rafael Cisneros
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Kare Publishing 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7024717/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32161857
http://dx.doi.org/10.14744/eej.2018.75047
_version_ 1783498445790642176
author Alfayate, Ruth Pérez
Mercade, Montse
Rojas, Jorge Vera
Luaña, Roberto Estévez
Pereda, Ana Antoranz
Algar, Juan
Cabello, Rafael Cisneros
author_facet Alfayate, Ruth Pérez
Mercade, Montse
Rojas, Jorge Vera
Luaña, Roberto Estévez
Pereda, Ana Antoranz
Algar, Juan
Cabello, Rafael Cisneros
author_sort Alfayate, Ruth Pérez
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: Root canal shaping is as important as irrigation and filling when attempting to obtain a high success rate in endodontic treatment. The creation of a glide path before the use of rotary instruments reduces the risk of posterior iatrogenic errors. The objective of the present study was to evaluate instrumentation time and root canal transport after using 2 different glide path rotary systems. METHODS: In total, 60 mesiobuccal root canals of mandibular molars, with curvature angles between 11° and 82°, were standardized to measure 15 mm. The specimens were divided into 2 groups, depending on their angles of curvature (11º–38º and 39º–82º), and further divided into 4 groups (n=15). Two groups were instrumented using the PathFile system and the other 2 using the ProFinder system. The angle and radius of curvature were measured at the most abrupt angle of curvature before and after instrumentation. Both measurements were analyzed and compared using AutoCAD software to determine canal transportation. Curvature angles were compared using Student’s t test and the radii of curvature using the Wilcoxon test. The time for instrumentation was also evaluated using Student’s t tests. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between the two systems with respect to root canal transport (P>0.05); however, the ProFinder system took a longer time to create a glide path (P=0.004). CONCLUSION: Both systems were equally effective in creating a glide path; however, the PathFile system proved to be faster than the ProFinder system.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7024717
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Kare Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70247172020-03-11 Comparison of PathFile and ProFinder Systems to Create a Glide Path in Curved Root Canals Alfayate, Ruth Pérez Mercade, Montse Rojas, Jorge Vera Luaña, Roberto Estévez Pereda, Ana Antoranz Algar, Juan Cabello, Rafael Cisneros Eur Endod J Original Article OBJECTIVE: Root canal shaping is as important as irrigation and filling when attempting to obtain a high success rate in endodontic treatment. The creation of a glide path before the use of rotary instruments reduces the risk of posterior iatrogenic errors. The objective of the present study was to evaluate instrumentation time and root canal transport after using 2 different glide path rotary systems. METHODS: In total, 60 mesiobuccal root canals of mandibular molars, with curvature angles between 11° and 82°, were standardized to measure 15 mm. The specimens were divided into 2 groups, depending on their angles of curvature (11º–38º and 39º–82º), and further divided into 4 groups (n=15). Two groups were instrumented using the PathFile system and the other 2 using the ProFinder system. The angle and radius of curvature were measured at the most abrupt angle of curvature before and after instrumentation. Both measurements were analyzed and compared using AutoCAD software to determine canal transportation. Curvature angles were compared using Student’s t test and the radii of curvature using the Wilcoxon test. The time for instrumentation was also evaluated using Student’s t tests. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between the two systems with respect to root canal transport (P>0.05); however, the ProFinder system took a longer time to create a glide path (P=0.004). CONCLUSION: Both systems were equally effective in creating a glide path; however, the PathFile system proved to be faster than the ProFinder system. Kare Publishing 2018-03-06 /pmc/articles/PMC7024717/ /pubmed/32161857 http://dx.doi.org/10.14744/eej.2018.75047 Text en Copyright: © 2018 European Endodontic Journal http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
spellingShingle Original Article
Alfayate, Ruth Pérez
Mercade, Montse
Rojas, Jorge Vera
Luaña, Roberto Estévez
Pereda, Ana Antoranz
Algar, Juan
Cabello, Rafael Cisneros
Comparison of PathFile and ProFinder Systems to Create a Glide Path in Curved Root Canals
title Comparison of PathFile and ProFinder Systems to Create a Glide Path in Curved Root Canals
title_full Comparison of PathFile and ProFinder Systems to Create a Glide Path in Curved Root Canals
title_fullStr Comparison of PathFile and ProFinder Systems to Create a Glide Path in Curved Root Canals
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of PathFile and ProFinder Systems to Create a Glide Path in Curved Root Canals
title_short Comparison of PathFile and ProFinder Systems to Create a Glide Path in Curved Root Canals
title_sort comparison of pathfile and profinder systems to create a glide path in curved root canals
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7024717/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32161857
http://dx.doi.org/10.14744/eej.2018.75047
work_keys_str_mv AT alfayateruthperez comparisonofpathfileandprofindersystemstocreateaglidepathincurvedrootcanals
AT mercademontse comparisonofpathfileandprofindersystemstocreateaglidepathincurvedrootcanals
AT rojasjorgevera comparisonofpathfileandprofindersystemstocreateaglidepathincurvedrootcanals
AT luanarobertoestevez comparisonofpathfileandprofindersystemstocreateaglidepathincurvedrootcanals
AT peredaanaantoranz comparisonofpathfileandprofindersystemstocreateaglidepathincurvedrootcanals
AT algarjuan comparisonofpathfileandprofindersystemstocreateaglidepathincurvedrootcanals
AT cabellorafaelcisneros comparisonofpathfileandprofindersystemstocreateaglidepathincurvedrootcanals