Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 27, 2026
Guided Endodontics: Three-Dimensional Planning and Template-Aided Preparation of Endodontic Access Cavities
Published on: May 24, 2022
ProTaper and WaveOne systems three-dimensional comparison of device parameters after the shaping technique. A
Mario Dioguardi1, Giuseppe Troiano1, Luigi Laino1
1Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Foggia University Foggia, Italy.
Aim:
The aim of this study is to highlights possible differences in the volume of shaping and canal surface area after the using of common endodontic devices ProTaper Universal and WaveOne systems.
Methods:
Forty ISO 15, 0.02 taper, S-shaped endo-training Blocks (Dentsply, Maillefer) were assigned in two groups (n = 20 for each group). For each block the initial working length (WL) was evaluated with a 10 K-files (Dentsply Maillefer), so the glide path was created with PathFile 1, 2 and 3 (Dentsply Maillefer) at the WL. After that, simulated canals in the group 1 were shaped with S1, S2, F1 and F2 at WL; while in group 2 it was used single-file WaveOne primary in reciprocating motion. After shaping, the resin blocks were analysed with Skyscan 1172 scanner (Skyscan, Kontich, Belgium) and then volumetrically at a source voltage of 65 kV and a source current of 153 uA.
Results:
No statistically differences (P > 0.05) have been found in terms of volume and surface area after the use of ProTaper Universal and WaveOne systems.
Conclusions:
Although, results from micro-CT analysis revealed that Wave One result in a decrease of volume and surface area of shaping than ProTaper Universal, differences are not statistically significant.
