Comparison of shaping efficacy and debris extrusion of different rotary instruments with or without glide path in root canal

The aim of this in-vitro study was to compare (i) canal transportation and (ii)centering ability of three different rotary systems working with reciprocal (Resiproc; VDW, Munich, Germany) and rotation movement systems (ProTaper Next; Dentsply, Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland), (OneShape; Micro-Mega, Besancon Cedex, France) with or without creating a glide path using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT), (iii) to assess preparation time and (iv) amount of debris extrusion produced by different rotary systems with or without glide path. One hundred twenty severe curved mesial root canals of mandibular I. molars were randomly divided into six groups and scanned before and after preperation with CBCT. The root canals were instrumented with; Reciproc, ProTaper Next, OneShape, Proglider+Reciproc, OneG+oneShape and ProGlider+ProTaper Next. The amount of extruded debris were weighed using a 10-5microbalance. Transportation and centering ratio were assessed by using 3D reconstructions on CBCT images. The working time required to complete instrumentation was also recorded. One-way analysis of variance and Tukey tests were used for inter-group and multi-group comparisons of the obtained data, respectively. Statistical significance was set as p<0.05. According to the results obtained, when compared transportation at different levels, statistically significant differences were detected in all groups at 7 mm (p<0,05). No statistically significant differences were detected in centering ability values at different levels (p>0,05). Creating a glide path resulted better centering ability in the root canals and less transportation of the root canals. Created glide path group had statistically significant effect on the amount of extrusion (p<0,05). OneShape group extruded statistically significant less irrigant compared to other groups (p<0,05). The preparation time with ProGlider+ProTaper Next was statistically significantly longer than other systems (p< 0.05). In conclusion, all systems used in the present study caused the formation of transportation in acceptable levels. All systems showed deviation from canal center. With in the limitations of this study glide path rotary instruments extruded relatively more debris. To draw more reliable conclusions further supporting research by including different groups is necessary. Keywords: Glide path, Debris extrusion, CBCT, Transportation, Reciprocation, Single file