Abstract
Purpose
The aim of this study was to investigate the apical transportation of the ProGlider and ProTaper Next using 3 different motions (150° clockwise [CW]; 0° counter clockwise [CCW], 270° CW-30° CCW; and [360° CW] continuous rotation).
Materials and Methods
36 simulated, curved, plastic training blocks were randomly distributed into 3 groups for treatment according to the movement kinematics used for ProGlider (Dentsply Maillefer) followed by ProTaper Next (Dentsply Maillefer) instruments (n = 12): 150° CW-30° CCW, 270° CW-30° CCW, and 360° CW (continuous rotation). Pre- and post-instrumentation photographs were taken from the root canals in a standardized manner. Root canal transportation was calculated at 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 mm from the apical terminus of the canal. Data were analyzed using a Kruskal-Walis H test (p = .05).
Results
At the 1- and 2-mm levels, both reciprocating motions (150° CW-30° CCW and 270° CW-30° CCW) resulted in less transportation than those of continuous rotation (p<.05). However, there were no significant differences between the groups at the 3-, 4-, and 5-mm levels (p>.05).
Conclusions
Both reciprocating motions were found to have less canal transportation than the continuous rotation group at the 1- and 2-mm levels. This is the first study about the use of the ProGlider and ProTaper Next activated by different motions. Reciprocating motion can be beneficial for ProGlider and ProTaper Next to reduce transportation of root canals.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.