Restor Dent Endod.  2018 Nov;43(4):e41. 10.5395/rde.2018.43.e41.

Comparison of the ability of Reciproc and Reciproc Blue instruments to reach the full working length with or without glide path preparation

• Adıguzel
• Tufenkci P

• KMID: 2455572
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2018.43.e41

Abstract

OBJECTIVES
The purpose of the present study was to compare the mean preparation times and frequency with which Reciproc and Reciproc Blue instruments reached the full working length in mandibular molars, with or without glide path preparation.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Previously untreated mesiobuccal and mesiolingual canals with completely formed apices were randomly divided into 6 groups (n = 50) depending on the usage of Reciproc (RC; VDW), Reciproc Blue (RC Blue; VDW), C-Pilot (CP; VDW), and R-Pilot (RP; VDW) files: RC, RC Blue, RC + C-Pilot (RC-CP), RC-Blue + C-Pilot (RC Blue-CP), RC+R-Pilot (RC-RP), and RC Blue + R-Pilot (RC Blue-RP). A glide path was prepared using the hand-operated C-Pilot or the machine-operated R-Pilot instruments, respectively. The χ2 test, analysis of variance, and the Tukey post hoc test were used for statistical comparisons.
RESULTS
No statistically significant differences were observed in the distribution of the frequency of reaching the full working length in the RC (94%), RC Blue (88%), RC-CP (94%), RC Blue-CP (90%), RC-RP (96%), and RC Blue-RP (92%) groups (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
Preparation of a glide path did not have a significant effect on reaching the full working length using these systems.

Keyword

C-Pilot; Glide path; R-Pilot; Reciproc; Reciproc Blue

MeSH Terms

Molar