Please do NOT make direct edits to the PDF using the editing tools as doing so could lead us to overlook your desired changes. Rather, please request corrections by using the tools in the Comment pane to annotate the PDF and call out the changes you are requesting. If you opt to annotate the file with software other than Adobe Reader then please also highlight the appropriate place in the PDF file.
PDF ANNOTATIONS Adobe Reader version 9 Adobe Reader version X and XIWhen you open the PDF file using Adobe Reader, the Commenting tool bar should be displayed automatically; if not, click on 'Tools', select 'Comment & Markup', then click on 'Show Comment & Markup tool bar' (or 'Show Commenting bar' on the Mac). If these options are not available in your Adobe Reader menus then it is possible that your Adobe Acrobat version is lower than 9 or the PDF has not been prepared properly.
(Mac) PDF ANNOTATIONS (Adobe Reader version 9)The default for the Commenting tool bar is set to 'off' in version 9. To change this setting select 'Edit | Preferences', then 'Documents' (at left under 'Categories'), then select the option 'Never' for 'PDF/A View Mode'.
Background.This study purposed to compare the effect of new single glide path files on extruded apical debris and total preparation times during root canal preparation with the WaveOne Gold system. Methods. Thirty-six extracted human lower molar teeth with mesiobuccal canal curvature angles of 25‒35° were randomly splited to three groups. In group 1, the glide path was created with WaveOne Gold Glider (WGG) file at working length (WL); in group 2, the glide path was created with ProGlider file (PG); in group 3, the glide path was not performed. In all the groups, the root canals were shaped with WaveOne Gold Primary (WOG) reciprocating files at WL. Apically extruded debris during instrumentation was picked up into pre-weighed Eppendorf tubes. The weight of the dry extruded debris was calculated by subtracting the pre- and post-instrumentation weights of the tubes in each group. The total time elapsed during the canal preparation was calculated with a chronometer. The data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey tests. Results. The WGG/WOG group extruded significantly fewer debris than the WOG and PG/WOG groups (P<0.05). There was no significant difference between the WOG and PG/WOG groups (P>0.05). The WGG/WOG and PG/WOG groups were significantly faster than the WOG group. Conclusion. The amount of debris extruded apically significantly diminished when conventional WGG was implemented before using WOG. The total preparation time significantly diminished when the WOG file was used in combination with reciprocating and rotary glide path preparation techniques.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.