The Influence of a Glide Path on the Lifespan of WaveOne Reciprocating Files

Emilia Karova^1, and Snezhanka Topalova-Pirinska¹

¹Department of Conservative Dentistry, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Medical University, Sofia, Bulgaria

Cite this paper:
Emilia Karova and Snezhanka Topalova-Pirinska. The Influence of a Glide Path on the Lifespan of WaveOne Reciprocating Files. International Journal of Dental Sciences and Research. 2014; 2(3):59-62. doi: 10.12691/ijdsr-2-3-3

Abstract

Background: Nickel-titanium instrument separation is a serious concern in endodontic therapy. A significant reduction of rotary instrument separation could be obtained when use of rotary file is anticipated by an initial manual preflaring and glide path. Normally this procedure is carried out by stainless steel hand files but new rotary nickel-titanium instruments (PathFiles) for mechanical glide path has been recently introduced. Methodology/Principal Findings: Canal preparation was performed on 100 Endo-Training Block simulators divided in two equal groups, depending on the used technique (with and without a glide path). Average lifespan and cumulative survival at the time of WaveOne (Dentsply Maillefer) files before and after the creation of a glide path with PathFiles (Dentsply Maillefer) were tested. Following the instructions of the producer all the files were operated using The WaveOne™ Endodontic system (Dentsply Maillefer). All WaveOne files worked till fracture occurred. During mechanical instrumentation each file was coated with Glyde™ (Dentsply Maillefer) to act as a lubricant, and copious irrigation with 5.25% NaOCl was carried out. Eight WaveOne reciprocating files were used in canals’ preparation and six of them broke: 4 files before the creation of a glide path and 2 after the initial enlargement of the canals with PathFile system. The average lifespan of one WaveOne file without a creation of a glide path was 10.25±2.50 canals and after a creation of a glide path – 17.50±2.12 canals. The difference was statistically significant (p<0.05). The instruments used after a glide path was created presented a significantly longer survival at the time (р<0.05). Conclusions: Within the limits of this study, NiTi rotary Path Files appear to be suitable instruments for safe and easy creation of the glide path before use of WaveOne reciprocating files. The initial enlargement of the canals increases significantly the average lifespan and the survival rate of WaveOne files.

Keywords:
nickel-titanium instruments WaveOne PathFiles glide path lifespan cummulative survival

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

References:

[1]	Alapati SB, et al. Brantley WA, Svec TA, Powers JM, Nusstein JM, Daehn GS. SEM observations of nickel-titanium rotary endodontic instruments that fractured during clinical use. J.Endod 2005 31 (1): 40-43
[2]	Berruti E, Negro AR, Lendini M, Pasqualini D. Influence of manual preflaring and torque on the failure rate of ProTaper rotary instruments. J Endod 2004; 30: 228-30
[3]	Berruti E, Paolino DS, Chiandussi G, et al. Root canal anatomy preservation of WaveOne reciprocating files with and without glide path. J Endod 2012; 38: 101-4.
[4]	Berutti E, Cantatore G. Rotary instruments in Nickel Titanium. In: Castellucci A. Endodontics Vol. 1. Ed. Il Tridente Florence 2006: 518-547.
[5]	Berutti E, Chiandussi G, Gaviglio I, Ibba A: Comparative analysis of torsional and bending stresses in two mathematical models of nickel titanium rotary instruments: ProTaper versus ProFile. J Endodon 2003; 1 (29): 15-19.
[6]	Cheung GS, Peng B, Bian Z, Shen Y, Darvell BW. Defects in ProTaper S1 instruments after clinical use: fractographic examination. Int Endod J 2005 38 (11): 802-809.
[7]	Davis RD, Marshall JG, Baumgartner JC. Effect of early coronal flaring on working length change in curved canals using rotary nickel-titanium versus stainless steel instruments. J Endod 2003; 28: 438-42.
[8]	Di Fiore PM. A dozen ways to prevent nickel-titanium rotary instrument fracture. J Am Dent Assoc 2007; 138: 196-201.
[9]	Garip Y, Gunday M. The use of computed tomography when comparing nickel-titanium and stainless steel files during preparation of simulated curved canals. Int Endod J 2001; 34: 452-457.
[10]	Iqbal MK, Kohli MR, Kim JS. A retrospective clinical study of incidence of root canal instrument separation in an endodontics graduate programme: A PennEndo database study. J Endod 2006; 32: 1048-52.
[11]	Martin B, Zelada G, Varela P, et al. Factors influencing the fracture of nickel-titanium rotary instruments. J Endod 2003; 36: 262-6.
[12]	Parahos P, Gordon I, Messer HH. Factors influencing defects of rotary nickel-titanium endodontic instruments after clinical use. J Endod 2004; 30: 722-5.
[13]	Pedulla E, Grande NM, Plotino G, Gambarini G, Rapisarda E. Influence of continuous or reciprocating motion on cyclic fatigue resistance of 4 different nickel-titanium rotary instruments. J Enodod 2103; 39: 258-261.
[14]	Peters OA, Peters CI, Schonenberger K, Barbakow F. ProTaper rotary root canal preparation: assessment of torque and force in relation to canal anatomy. Int Endod J 2003; 36: 93-99.
[15]	Peters OA, Peters CI. Cleaning and shaping of the root canal system. In: Hargreaves KM, Cohen S, eds. Cohen’s Pathways of the Pulp, 10th ed. St. Louis, MO, Mosby; 2010: 283-348.
[16]	Peters OA. Current challenges and concepts in the preparation of root canal systems: a review. J Endod 2004; 30 (6): 559-567.
[17]	Pettiette MT, Delano EO, Trope M. Evaluation of success rate of endodontic treatment performed by students with stainless-steel K-files and nickel-titanium hand files. J Endod 2001; 27: 124-27.
[18]	Pruett JP, Clement DJ, Carnes DL Jr. Cyclic fatigue testing of nickel-titanium endodontic instruments. J Endod 1997; 23: 77-85.
[19]	Roland DD, Andelin WE, Browning DF, Hsu G-HR, Torabinejad M. The effect of preflaring on the rates of separation for 0.04 taper nickel titanium rotary instruments. J Endod 2002; 28: 543-545.
[20]	Ruddle CJ. The ProTaper technique. Endod Topics 2005; 10: 187-90.
[21]	Sattapan B, Nervo GJ, Palamara JE, Messer HH. Defects in rotary nickel-titanium files after clinical use. J Endod 2000; 26: 161-5.
[22]	Sattapan B, Palamara JE, Messer HH. Torque during canal instrumentation using rotary nickel-titanium files. J Endod 2000; 26: 156-60.
[23]	Schäfer E, Florek H. Efficiency of rotary nickel-titanium K3 instruments compared with stainless-steel hand KFlexofile. Part 1. Shaping ability in simulated curved canals. Int Endod J 2003; 36: 199-207.
[24]	Schäfer E, Lohmann D. Efficiency of rotary nickel-titanium FlexMaster instruments compared with stainless steel hand K-Flexofile: part 1. Shaping ability in simulated curved canals. Int Endod J 2002; 35: 505-13.
[25]	Schäfer E, Schlingemann R. Efficiency of rotary nickel-titanium K3 instruments compared with stainless steel hand K-Flexofile, part 2: Cleaning effectiveness and instrumentation results in severely curved root canals of extracted teeth. Int Endod J 2003; 36: 208-17.
[26]	Schäfer E, Schulz-Bongert U, Tulus G. Comparison of Hand Stainless Steel and Nickel Titanium Rotary Instrumentation: A Clinical Study. J Endod 2004; 30 (6): 432-435.
[27]	Setzer FC, Bombe CP. Influence of combined cyclic fatigue and torsional stress on the fracture point of nickel-titanium rotary instruments. J Endod 2013; 39: 133-137.
[28]	Short JA, Morgan LA, Baumgartner JC. A comparison of canal centering ability of four instrumentation techniques. J Endod 1997; 23: 503-7.
[29]	Sonntag D, Guntermann A, Kim SK, Stachniss V. Root canal shaping with manual stainless steel files and rotary NiTi files performed by students. Int Endod J, 2003; 36: 246-255.
[30]	Suter B, Lussi A, Sequeira P. Probability of removing fractured instruments from root canals. Int Endod J 2005; 38: 112-123.
[31]	Taşdemir T, Aydemir H, Inan U, Ünal O. Canal preparation with Hero 642 rotary NiTi instruments compared with stainless steel hand K-file using computed tomography. Int Endod J 2005; 38: 402-408.
[32]	Tygesen YA, Steiman R, Ciavarro C. Comparison of diltortion nad separation utilizing ProFile and Pow-R nickel-titanium rotary files. J Endod 2001; 27: 762-4.
[33]	Varela Patino P, Biedma B, Rodriguez CL, Cantatore G, Bahillo JC. The Influence of a Manual Glide Path on the Separation Rate of NiTi Rotary Instruments. J Endodon 2005; 31 (2): 114-116.
[34]	Varela-Patino P, Ibanez-Parraga A, Rivas-Mundina B, et al. Alternating versus continuous rotation: A comparative study of the effect on instrument life. J Endod 2010; 36: 157-9.
[35]	Varela-Patino P, Martin B, Rodrigues NJ, et al. Fracture rate of nickel-titanium instruments using continuous versus alternating rotation. Endodontic practice Today 2008; 2: 193-7.
[36]	Weiger R, Brückner M, ElAyouti A, Löst C. Preparation of curved canals with rotary FlexMaster instruments compared to Lightspeed instruments and hand files. Int Endod J 2003; 36: 483-90.
[37]	Yao JH, Schwartz SA, Beeson TJ. Cyclic fatigue of three types of rotary nickel-titanium files in a dynamic model. J Endod 2006; 32: 55-7.
[38]	Yared G. Canal preparation using only one NiTi rotary instrument: preliminary observations. Int Endod J 2008; 41: 339-44.
[39]	Yared GM, Bou Dagher FE, Machtou P. Influence of rotational speed, torque, and operator’s proficiency on ProFile failures. Int Endod J 2001; 34: 47-53.
[40]	You SY, Bae KS, Baek SH, et al. Lifespan of one nickel-titanium rotary file with reciprocating motion in curved root canals. J Endod 2010; 36: 1991-94.
[41]	Zelada G, Varela P, Martin B, et al. The effect of rotational speed and the curvature of root canals on the breakage of rotary endodontic instruments. J Endod 2002; 28: 540-2.