ProTaper and WaveOne systems three-dimensional comparison of device parameters after the shaping technique. A micro-CT study on simulated root canals.

AIM

The aim of this study is to highlights possible differences in the volume of shaping and canal surface area after the using of common endodontic devices ProTaper Universal and WaveOne systems.

METHODS

Forty ISO 15, 0.02 taper, S-shaped endo-training Blocks (Dentsply, Maillefer) were assigned in two groups (n = 20 for each group). For each block the initial working length (WL) was evaluated with a 10 K-files (Dentsply Maillefer), so the glide path was created with PathFile 1, 2 and 3 (Dentsply Maillefer) at the WL. After that, simulated canals in the group 1 were shaped with S1, S2, F1 and F2 at WL; while in group 2 it was used single-file WaveOne primary in reciprocating motion. After shaping, the resin blocks were analysed with Skyscan 1172 scanner (Skyscan, Kontich, Belgium) and then volumetrically at a source voltage of 65 kV and a source current of 153 uA.

RESULTS

No statistically differences (P > 0.05) have been found in terms of volume and surface area after the use of ProTaper Universal and WaveOne systems.

CONCLUSIONS

Although, results from micro-CT analysis revealed that Wave One result in a decrease of volume and surface area of shaping than ProTaper Universal, differences are not statistically significant.