Simulated root canals preparation time, comparing ProTaper Next and WaveOne Gold systems, performed by an undergraduate student

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to compare the WaveOne Gold and ProTaper Next systems regarding the time spent preparing simulated canals performed by an inexperienced student. Material and Methods: 80 simulated L-shaped canals were randomly divided into two groups (n = 40) and numbered in order of instrumentation. Canals were instrumented with WaveOne Gold (group 1) and ProTaper Next (group 2) systems. The effective instrumentation time and the number of instrumentation cycles were recorded. All procedures were performed by the same operator. Statistical analysis was obtained by the Mann-Whitney, Kruskal-Wallis test with significance of p <0.05. Results: There were no statistically significant differences regarding the mean instrumentation time between the two instrumentation systems. The instrumentation time decreased over the experimental period, regardless of the technique used. Conclusions: Through a short learning curve, an inexperienced operator can prepare simulated canals in a very predictable time. Time spent was similar in a multi-file instrument system (ProTaper Next) and a single-file system (WaveOne Gold).