Evaluation of the Apical Seal after Root Canal Cleaning and Shaping with Two Nickel-Titanium Systems

1. Berutti E, Chiandussi G, Paolino DS, Scoti N, Cantatore G, Castellucci A, Pasqualini D. Canal shaping with Wave One Primary reciprocating files and ProTaper system: A comparative study. J of Endod. 2012; 38(4): 505-509.10.1016/j.joen.2011.12.04022414838Search in Google Scholar

2. Piati DCK, Pereira KFS, Ramos CRV, Ferreira LC, Arashiro FN, Zafalon EJ. Evaluation of filling techniques for canals instrumented with the reciproc system. Pesq Bras Odontoped Clin Integr. 2013; 13(2):205-212.10.4034/PBOCI.2013.132.10Search in Google Scholar

3. Carvalho EM, Carnevalli B. Analysis of the alteration root canal curvature before and after the preparation of for manual and rotatory technique. Rev Odontol UNESP. 2013; 41(5):335-339.Search in Google Scholar

4. Bane K, Faye B, Sarr M, Niang SO, Ndiaye D, Machtou P. Root canal shaping by single-file systems and rotary instruments: A laboratory study. Iran Endod J. 2015; 10(2):135-139.Search in Google Scholar

5. Semaan FS, Fagundes FS, Haragushiku G, Leonardi DP, Baratto Filho F. Mechanized endodontic: The evolution of continuous rotary systems. Rev Sul-Bras Odontol. 2009; 6(3):297-309.Search in Google Scholar

6. Yared G. Canal preparation using only one Ni-Ti rotary instrument: Preliminary observations. Int Endod J. 2008; 41(4):339-344.10.1111/j.1365-2591.2007.01351.x18081803Search in Google Scholar

7. Ruddle J. Endodontic Canal Preparation : Wave-One Single- Files Techniques. JOE. 2012; 3 (6): 1-7.Search in Google Scholar

8. Ahn SY, Kim HC, Kim E. Kinematic effects of nickel-titanium instruments with reciprocating or continuous rotation motion: A systematic review of in vitro studies. J Endod. 2016; 42(7):1009-1017.10.1016/j.joen.2016.04.00227185740Search in Google Scholar

9. Zmener O, Pamerjar CH, Macri E. Evaluation of the apical seal in root canals prepared with new rotary system and obturated with amethacrylate based endodontic sealer. An in vitro study. J Endod. 2005; 31(5): 392-395.10.1097/01.don.0000145424.99418.ad15851936Search in Google Scholar

10. Nevares G, de Albuquerque DS, Freire LG, Romeiro K, Fogel HM, dos Santos M. Efficacy of ProTaper NEXT compared with Reciproc in removing obturation material from severely curved root canals: A microcomputed tomography study. J Endod. 2016; 42(5):803-808.10.1016/j.joen.2016.02.01027117757Search in Google Scholar

11. Capar ID, Arslan H, Ertas H, Saygılı G. Effectiveness of ProTaper Universal retreatment instruments used with rotary or reciprocating adaptive motion in the removal of root canal filling material. Int Endod J.2015; 48(1):79-83.10.1111/iej.1227924627969Search in Google Scholar

12. Capar ID, Arslan H, Akcay M, Erats H. An in vitro comparison of apically extruded debris and instrumentation times with ProTaper Univerasal, ProTaper Next, Twisted File Adaptative and HyFlex instruments. J Endod. 2014; 40(10):1638-1641.10.1016/j.joen.2014.04.00425260737Search in Google Scholar

13. Pawar AM, Pawar MG, Metzger Z, Kokate SR. Self-adjusting file instrumentation results in less debris extrusion apically when compared to Wave One and ProTaper Next. J Conserv Dent. 2015; 18(2): 89-93.10.4103/0972-0707.153057437966525829683Search in Google Scholar

14. Taha NA, Ozawa T, Messer HH. Comparison of three techniques for preparing oval-shaped root canals. J Endod. 2010; 36(3):532-535.10.1016/j.joen.2009.11.01520171378Search in Google Scholar

15. Adorno GG, Yoshioka T, Suda H. Crack initiation on the apical root surfaces caused by three different nickel-titanium rotary files at different working lengths. J Endod. 2011; 37: 522-525.10.1016/j.joen.2010.12.00221419302Search in Google Scholar

16. Gavini G, Caldeira CL, Akisue E, Candeiro GT, Kawakami DA. Resistance to flexural fatigue of reciproc R25 files under continuous rotation and reciprocating movement. J Endod. 2012; 38(5):684-687.10.1016/j.joen.2011.12.03322515903Search in Google Scholar

17. De Deus G, Leal Vieira VT, Nogueira da Silva EJ, Lopes H, Elias CN, Moreira EJ. Bending resistance and dynamics and static cyclic fatigue life of Reciproc and WaveOne large instruments. J Endod. 2014; 40(4):575-579.10.1016/j.joen.2013.10.01324666915Search in Google Scholar

18. Jeon HJ, Paranjpe A, Ha HH, Kim E, Lee W, Kim HC. Apical enlargement according to different pecking times at working length using reciprocating files. J Endod. 2014; 40(2):281-284.10.1016/j.joen.2013.08.02024461419Search in Google Scholar

19. Fayyad DM, Elhakim Elgendy AA. Cutting efficiency of twisted versus machined nickel-titanium endodontic files. J Endod. 2011; 37(8):1143-1146.10.1016/j.joen.2011.03.03621763910Search in Google Scholar

20. Diognardi M, Troiana G, Laino L, LoRusso L, Giannatempo G, Lauritano F, Cicciu M, LaMuzio L. ProTaper and WaveOne systems three-dimensional comparison of device parameters after the shaping technique. A micro-CT study on simulated root canals. Int J Clin Exp Med. 2015; 8(10): 17830-17834.Search in Google Scholar