The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login



Volume / Issue

Online First

Related articles

VOLUME 15 , ISSUE 4 ( July-August, 2014 ) > List of Articles


The Influence of Different Angles and Reciprocation on the Shaping Ability of Two Nickel-Titanium Rotary Root Canal Instruments

Dina Al-Sudani, Hassan Kaabi, Abdulrahman Al Gamdi, Abdulla Al Dakheel

Citation Information : Al-Sudani D, Kaabi H, Gamdi AA, Dakheel AA. The Influence of Different Angles and Reciprocation on the Shaping Ability of Two Nickel-Titanium Rotary Root Canal Instruments. J Contemp Dent Pract 2014; 15 (4):451-455.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1561

Published Online: 01-01-2015

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2014; The Author(s).



The purpose of the present study was to investigate and compare the effect of different reciprocating movements and angles on the shaping ability of the WaveOne and the single-file ProTaper F2 using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT).

Materials and methods

The mesiobuccal canals of 40 extracted maxillary molars, with curvatures of 20 to 45° were coded and randomly divided into 4 equal experimental groups according to the instrument used (ProTaper F2 file and WaveOne) and the reciprocation range, for both instruments, a 150° angle was used for cutting and a 30° angle was used for release. Group 1 — WaveOne primary 150° CCW rotation angle and 30° CW rotation angle; Group 2 — WaveOne 90° CCW rotation angle and 30° CW rotation angle; Group 3 — ProTaper F2 150° CW rotation angle and 30° CCW rotation angle; Group 4 — ProTaper F2 90° CW rotation angle and 30° CCW rotation angle. Canals were scanned before and after preparation using CBCT to evaluate the volumetric change, canal transportation and the canal centering ability at 2.6, 5.2 and 7.8 mm from the apex. The mean ± standard deviation (SD) values were analyzed, and the significance level was set at p≤ 0.05


There was no significant difference in the amount of dentin removed among the experimental groups, except that WaveOne 150°CCW 30°CW significantly showed the least volume of dentin removed (0.40 ± 0.9) at 7.8 mm. All rotary systems tested in the different groups resulted in canal transportation in different directions at all examined levels. WaveOne 150°CCW 30°CW, demonstrated the lowest mean value of root canal transportation in both the mesial and furcal directions and in both the coronal and apical directions compared to the other groups. At the 7.8 level, WaveOne 150°CCW 30°CW yielded the highest mean centering ratio, whereas ProTaper F2 CW 150° CCW 30° yielded the lowest, statistically significant at p≤ 0.05


The results of the present study demonstrated that differences among various reciprocating motions and angles could affect the shaping ability of a single-file Nickel-titanium (NiTi) instrument.

How to cite this article

Al-Sudani D, Kaabi H, Gamdi AA, Dakheel AA. The Influence of Different Angles and Reciprocation on the Shaping Ability of Two Nickel-Titanium Rotary Root Canal Instruments. J Contemp Dent Pract 2014;15(4):451-455.

PDF Share
  1. Cleaning and shaping the root canal. Dent Clin North Am 1974;18(2):269-296.
  2. Canal and isthmus debridement efficacy using a sonic irrigation technique in a closed-canal system. J Endod 2012;38(9):1265-1268.
  3. Usage parameters of nickeltitanium rotary instruments: a survey of endodontists in the United States. J Endod 2009;35(9):1193-1197.
  4. Shaping ability of Quantec Series 2000 rotary nickel-titanium instruments in simulated root canals: Part 2. Int Endod J 1998;31(4):268-274.
  5. Fatigue resistance of engine-driven rotary nickel-titanium instruments produced by new manufacturing methods. J Endod 2008;34(8):1003-1005.
  6. Canal preparation using only one NiTi rotary instrument, preliminary observations. Int Endod J 2008;41(4):339-344.
  7. Alternating vs continuous rotation: a comparative study of the effect on instrument life. J Endod 2010;36(1):157-159.
  8. Shaping ability of reciprocating motion in curved root canals: a comparative study with micro-computed tomography. J Endod 2011;37(9):1296-1300.
  9. Cyclic fatigue of reciprocating and WaveOne reciprocating instruments. In Endod J 2012 Jul;45(7):614-618.
  10. A comparison of canal preparation in straight and curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1971;32(2):271-275.
  11. Comparison of nickeltitanium and stainless steel hand-file instrumentation using computed tomography. J Endod 1996;22(7):369-375.
  12. Extended cyclic fatigue life of F2 ProTaper instruments used in reciprocating movement. Int Endod J 2010:43(12):1063-1068.
  13. Assessment of apically extruded debris produced by the single-file ProTaper F2 technique under reciprocating movement. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2010;110(3);390-394.
  14. The influence of different angles of reciprocation on the cyclic fatigue of nickel-titanium endodontic instruments. J Endod 2012:38(10):1408-1411.
  15. Comparison of apical transportation between two rotary file systems and two hybrid rotary instrumentation sequences. J Endod 2010;36(7):1226-1229.
  16. Canal transportation after root canal instrumentation: a comparative study with computed tomography. J Endod 2007;33(8):962-965.
  17. The effect and preparation procedures on original canal shape and on apical foramen shape. J Endod 1975;1(8):255-262.
  18. Comparison of six files to prepare simulated root canals 2. Int Endod J 1992;25(2):67-81.
  19. Effect of altering the reciprocation range on the fatigue life and the shaping ability of WaveOne nickel-titanium instruments. J Endod 2013;39(5):685-688.
  20. Canal shaping with WaveOne primary reciprocating files and ProTaper system: a comparative study. J Endod 2012;38(4):505-509.
  21. Micro-computed tomography and scanning electron microscopy comparisons of two nickel-titanium rotary root canal instrument used with reciprocating motion. Scanning 2013;35(2):112-118.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.