Comparative evaluation of apical debris extrusion associated with using reciprocating and rotary systems with variable tapers, including single- and multiple-file sequences, and the influence of the glide path by Dr Tanvi Paliwal et al.

• 1.Schilder H. Cleaning and shaping the root canal. Dent Clin North Am. 1974 Apr;18(2):269–96.
• 2.Kumar A, Sarthaj S. Glide path in endodontics. Cons Dent Endod J. 2017 Jul–Dec;2(2):48–51.
• 3.Lampert CJ. The secret of rotary glide path with pre shapers specialized endo. Dent Tod. 2005;26:88–93.
• 4.Berutti E, Negro AR, Lendini M, Pasqualini D. Influence of manual preflaring and torque on the failure rate of ProTaper rotary instruments. J Endod. 2004 Apr;30(4):228–30. doi: 10.1097/00004770-200404000-00011.
• 5.Ruddle CJ, Machtou P, West JD. The shaping movement: fifth-generation technology. Dent Today. 2013 Apr;32(4):94, 96–9.
• 6.Robinson JP, Lumley PJ, Cooper PR, Grover LM, Walmsley AD. Reciprocating root canal technique induces greater debris accumulation than a continuous rotary technique as assessed by 3-dimensional micro-computed tomography. J Endod. 2013 Aug;39(8):1067–70. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2013.04.003.
• 7.Ehsani M, Farhang R, Harandi A, Tavanafar S, Raoof M, Galledar S. Comparison of apical extrusion of debris by using single-file, full-sequence rotary and reciprocating systems. J Dent (Tehran). 2016 Nov;13(6):394–9.
• 8.Plotino G, Grande NM, Sorci E, Malagnino VA, Somma F. A comparison of cyclic fatigue between used and new Mtwo Ni-Ti rotary instruments. Int Endod J. 2006 Sep;39(9):716–23. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2006.01142.x.
• 9.Ruiz-Hubard EE, Gutmann JL, Wagner MJ. A quantitative assessment of canal debris forced periapically during root canal instrumentation using two different techniques. J Endod. 1987 Dec;13(12):554–8. doi: 10.1016/s0099-2399(87)80004-3.
• 10.Myers GL, Montgomery S. A comparison of weights of debris extruded apically by conventional filing and Canal Master techniques. J Endod. 1991 Jun;17(6):275–9. doi: 10.1016/s0099-2399(06)81866-2.
• 11.Siqueira JF Jr, Rôças IN, Favieri A, Machado AG, Gahyva SM, Oliveira JC, Abad EC. Incidence of postoperative pain after intracanal procedures based on an antimicrobial strategy. J Endod. 2002 Jun;28(6):457–60. doi: 10.1097/00004770-200206000-00010.
• 12.Tinaz AC, Alacam T, Uzun O, Maden M, Kayaoglu G. The effect of disruption of apical constriction on periapical extrusion. J Endod. 2005 Jul;31(7):533–5. doi: 10.1097/01.don.0000152294.35507.35.
• 13.Hinrichs RE, Walker WA 3rd, Schindler WG. A comparison of amounts of apically extruded debris using handpiece-driven nickel-titanium instrument systems. J Endod. 1998 Feb;24(2):102–6. doi: 10.1016/s0099-2399(98)80086-1.
• 14.Baugh D, Wallace J. The role of apical instrumentation in root canal treatment: a review of the literature. J Endod. 2005 May;31(5):333–40. doi: 10.1097/01.don.0000145422.94578.e6.
• 15.Elnaghy AM, Elsaka SE. Evaluation of root canal transportation, centering ratio, and remaining dentin thickness associated with ProTaper Next instruments with and without glide path. J Endod. 2014 Dec;40(12):2053–6. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2014.09.001.
• 16.Ruddle CJ. Canal preparation: single-file shaping technique. Dent Today. 2012 Jan;31(1):124, 126–9.
• 17.Caviedes-Bucheli J, Castellanos F, Vasquez N, Ulate E, Munoz HR. The influence of two reciprocating single-file and two rotary-file systems on the apical extrusion of debris and its biological relationship with symptomatic apical periodontitis. A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Endod J. 2016 Mar;49(3):255–70. doi: 10.1111/iej.12452.
• 18.Bürklein S, Benten S, Schäfer E. Quantitative evaluation of apically extruded debris with different single-file systems: Reciproc, F360 and OneShape versus Mtwo. Int Endod J. 2014 May;47(5):405–9. doi: 10.1111/iej.12161.
• 19.Bürklein S, Schäfer E. Apically extruded debris with reciprocating single-file and full-sequence rotary instrumentation systems. J Endod. 2012 Jun;38(6):850–2. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2012.02.017.
• 20.West J. Manual versus mechanical endodontic glidepath. Dent Today. 2011 Jan;30(1):136, 138, 140 passim.
• 21.Peters OA, Paque F. Current developments in rotary root canal instrument technology and clinical use: a review. Quintessence Int. 2010 Jun;41(6):479–88.
• 22.Bergmans L, Van Cleynenbreugel J, Wevers M, Lambrechts P. Mechanical root canal preparation with NiTi rotary instruments: rationale, performance and safety. Status report for the American Journal of Dentistry. Am J Dent. 2001 Oct;14(5):324–33.
• 23.Berutti E, Paolino DS, Chiandussi G, Alovisi M, Cantatore G, Castellucci A, Pasqualini D. Root canal anatomy preservation of WaveOne reciprocating files with or without glide path. J Endod. 2012 Jan;38(1):101–4. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2011.09.030.
• 24.Boijink D, Costa DD, Hoppe CB, Kopper PM, Grecca FS. Apically extruded debris in curved root canals using the WaveOne Gold reciprocating and twisted file adaptive systems. J Endod. 2018 Aug;44(8):1289–92. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2018.04.011.
• 25.Dincer AN, Guneser MB, Arslan D. Apical extrusion of debris during root canal preparation using a novel nickel-titanium file system: WaveOne Gold. J Conserv Dent. 2017 Sep–Oct;20(5):322–5. doi: 10.4103/jcd.jcd_407_16.
• 26.Topçuoğlu HS, Düzgün S, Akpek F, Topçuoğlu G, Aktı A. Influence of a glide path on apical extrusion of debris during canal preparation using single-file systems in curved canals. Int Endod J. 2016 Jun;49(6):599–603. doi: 10.1111/iej.12484.
• 27.Gunes B, Yesildal Yeter K. Effects of different glide path files on apical debris extrusion in curved root canals. J Endod. 2018 Jul;44(7):1191–4. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2018.04.012.
• 28.Peters OA. Current challenges and concepts in the preparation of root canal systems: a review. J Endod. 2004 Aug;30(8):559–67. doi: 10.1097/01.don.0000129039.59003.9d.