Scouting Ability of 4 Pathfinding Instruments in Moderately Curved Molar Canals.
BACKGROUND
Glide path preparation has been recommended as a mandatory clinical step to ensure the safe usage of nickel-titanium (NiTi) rotary instruments. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and fracture rate of 4 pathfinding NiTi rotary instruments in mechanically negotiating moderately curved molar canals.


METHODS
Moderately curved maxillary (n = 120) and mandibular (n = 120) molars were randomly distributed into 4 experimental groups (n = 60, 30 maxillary and 30 mandibular molars) according to the instrument used for glide path preparation: ScoutRace 10/.02 (FKG Dentaire, La Chaux-de-Fonds, Switzerland) (800 rpm and 1-Ncm torque), ProDesign 25/.01 (Easy Equipamentos Odontológicos, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil) (350 rpm and 1-Ncm torque), Mtwo 10/.04 (VDW, Munich, Germany) (280 rpm and 1.2 Ncm torque), or ProGlider 16/.02 (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland) (300 rpm and 5-Ncm torque). The instrument fracture rate and the absolute and percentage frequencies of molars in which the pathfinding instruments reached the full working length in all root canals according to tooth and canal types were recorded and statistically compared using the Pearson's chi-square test (α = 5%).


RESULTS
The highest and lowest frequency of reached the full working length canals were observed in the ScoutRace (68.3%) and ProDesign (38.3%) groups (P < .05), respectively, whereas the Mtwo (58.3%) and ProGlider (51.6%) groups showed intermediate results (P > .05). The ProGlider group showed the highest percentage frequency of instrument separation (11.6%) followed by the Mtwo (8.3%), ScoutRace (3.3%), and ProDesign (3.3%) groups (P < .05).


CONCLUSIONS
ScoutRace performed more efficiently and with less instrument breakage than the other systems. ProDesign was the least efficient, and ProGlider exhibited the highest rate of instrument breakage among the systems tested.
Department of Endodontics, Fluminense Federal University, Niteroi, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Electronic address: endogus@gmail.com.
Gustavo
G
De-Deus
Department of Endodontics, Fluminense Federal University, Niteroi, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Felipe Gonçalves
FG
Belladonna
Department of Dentistry II, Federal University of Maranhão, São Luís, Maranhão, Brazil.
Erick Miranda
EM
Souza
Department of Endodontics, Fluminense Federal University, Niteroi, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Vanessa de Oliveira
Vde O
Alves
Department of Endodontics, Grande Rio University, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Emmanuel João Nogueira Leal
EJ
Silva
Department of Endodontics, Fluminense Federal University, Niteroi, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Evaldo
E
Rodrigues
Department of Restorative Dentistry, Dental School of Ribeirão Preto, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Marco Aurélio
MA
Versiani
Department of Endodontics, São Leopoldo Mandic University, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil.
Carlos Eduardo da Silveira
CE
Bueno
D003722:Dental Alloys; D003762:Dental Instruments; D003786:Dental Pulp Cavity / Q000033:anatomy & histology* / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging; D004867:Equipment Design; D004868:Equipment Failure; D006801:Humans; D008963:Molar / Q000033:anatomy & histology* / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging; D009532:Nickel; D018915:Root Canal Preparation / Q000295:instrumentation*; D014025:Titanium; D019227:Tooth Apex / Q000033:anatomy & histology* / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging; D054159:Torsion, Mechanical
D003722:Dental Alloys; C040654:titanium nickelide; D009532:Nickel; D014025:Titanium
Glide path; nickel-titanium rotary instruments; pathfinding instruments; rotary motion