Comparison of 2 Canal Preparation Techniques in the Induction of Microcracks: A Pilot Study with Cadaver Mandibles

IntroductionThe purpose of this pilot study in a cadaver model was to compare 2 different shaping techniques regarding the induction of dentinal microcracks.MethodsThree lower incisors from each of 6 adult human cadaver skulls were randomly distributed into 3 groups: the control group (CG, no instrumentation), the GT group (GT Profile hand files; Dentsply Tulsa Dental, Tulsa, OK), and the WO group (WaveOne; Dentsply Tulsa Dental). In the GT group, manual shaping in a crown-down sequence with GT Profile hand files was performed. In the WO group, Primary WaveOne files were used to the working length. Teeth were separated from the mandibles by careful removal of soft tissue and bone under magnification. Roots were sectioned horizontally at 3, 6, and 9 mm from the apex using a low-speed saw. Color photographs at 2 magnifications (25× and 40×) were obtained. Three blinded examiners registered the presence of microcracks (yes/no), extension (incomplete/complete), direction (buccolingual/mesiodistal), and location. Data were analyzed with chi-square tests at P < .05.ResultsMicrocracks were found in 50% (CG and GT) and 66% (WO) of teeth at 3 mm, 16.6% (CG) and 33.3% (GT and WO) at 6 mm, and 16.6% in all 3 groups at 9 mm from the apex. There were no significant differences in the incidence of microcracks between all groups at 3 (P = .8), 6 (P = .8), or 9 mm (P = 1). All microcracks were incomplete, started at the pulpal wall, and had a buccolingual direction.ConclusionsWithin the limitations of this pilot study, a relationship between the shaping techniques (GT hand and WaveOne) and the incidence of microcracks could not be shown compared with uninstrumented controls.