Comparison of Canal Transportation by Two Rotary Systems, Neoniti vs. Wave One, Both Used with Reciprocal Motion.

Abstract

Objectives: Preserving the original canal morphology is the ideal goal during root canal preparation. This study aimed to compare canal transportation at various cross-sections using the Neoniti and Wave One Gold rotary systems, both applied with reciprocal motion. Materials and Methods: Forty acrylic S-shape canal simulator endo-blocks were used in this study. Two preparation protocols were applied: (1) Proglider (#16/0.02) followed by Wave One Gold (#20/0.07) and (2) GPS followed by A1#20 (reciprocal motion). The canals were dyed before and after preparation, and images were captured from both stages using blocks. These images were then superimposed using Adobe Photoshop to assess differences, and measurements were taken with Digimizer image analysis software. The data was analyzed using an independent samples T-test, with statistical significance set at P<0.05. Results: Transportation was significantly greater in the middle third of the canal simulator in the group that was treated with Proglider (#16/0.02) followed by Wave One Gold (#20/0.07). However, no significant differences were observed in the coronal or apical thirds. Conclusion: While the manufacturer of Neoniti recommends using this system with continuous rotational motion, it can also be effectively utilized with reciprocal motion, yielding satisfactory results while respecting the canal anatomy.