Shaping ability of Procodile and R6 Reziflow nickel‐titanium reciprocating instruments in curved mesial root canals of mandibular molars: A MicroCT study

Abstract

AbstractTo compare the shaping ability of Procodile and R6 Reziflow instruments used in reciprocating motion in severely curved root canals, assessed with micro‐computed tomography (μCT). Fourteen extracted human mandibular first molars were randomly assigned to two instrumentation techniques (n = 14 mesial root canals): Procodile or R6 Reziflow. For both groups, root canals were prepared to the working length up to a size 25, .06 taper. Molars were virtually divided into apical, middle and coronal thirds and μCT was used to scan all samples pre‐ and post‐root canal. Canal transportation, centring ability, volume, surface area and unprepared area were evaluated. Geometrical parameter changes were compared with preoperative values (one‐way analyses of variance and Tukey multiple comparison post‐hoc test) between groups and Student t‐test within groups (α = 0.05) Significantly less transportation was observed associated with the Procodile technique in the molar's coronal third compared to the R6 Reziflow technique (p < .05). No significant differences in root canal centring ability, volume, surface area and unprepared area were observed. Procodile showed a lower percentage increase of surface area compared to R6 Reziflow (p < .05). The Procodile and R6 Reziflow techniques applied to first molar root canal performed similarly except for the less transportation observed in the coronal third using Procodile.Research HighlightsMicroCT analysis of canal geometry before and after instrumentation revealed that Procodile and R6 Reziflow showed a similar shaping ability to shape curved root canals without substantially modifications of the original tooth anatomy.