Effect of Manual and Mechanical Glide Path Preparation on Working Length Accuracy.
For patients and families
In plain language
An automatic summary of structured registry data. It is an orientation aid, not a substitute for the official protocol or a physician assessment.
- What is being studied
- The protocol lists: Manual Glide Path Preparation, Mechanical Glide Path Preparation.
- Who it may be relevant to
- Registry conditions: Achievement of Working Length After Manual Versus Mechanical Glide Path. Basic parameters: No limits · All.
- What needs checking
- Age, condition and sex are only basic indicators. Prior treatment, laboratory values and other mandatory requirements appear in the eligibility criteria below.
- Where it takes place
- Center list to be confirmed — check the primary protocol.
- Next step
- Save the trial, show it to the treating physician, and confirm current recruitment with the study center. Costs, documents and travel →
Unsure about the terms? Read our patient guide →
Official title
Comparison of Working Length Accuracy Following Manual and Mechanical Glide Path Preparation: An In Vitro Study.
Overview
Accurate working length determination is essential for successful root canal treatment and is influenced by proper glide path preparation. This in vitro study aims to compare the accuracy of working length achievement following manual and mechanical glide path preparation techniques. Sixty extracted single-rooted permanent teeth will be randomly allocated into two groups. Group 1 will undergo manual glide path preparation using stainless steel K-files, while Group 2 will receive mechanical glide path preparation using rotary PathFile instruments. Initial and final working lengths will be measured using an electronic apex locator and confirmed with digital radiographs. The difference between the initial and final working lengths will be analyzed statistically. The results of this study will help identify the more effective glide path preparation technique for maintaining working length accuracy and improving endodontic treatment outcomes.
Detailed description
This study is an in vitro randomized controlled experimental investigation designed to evaluate and compare the accuracy of working length achievement following manual and mechanical glide path preparation techniques during root canal treatment.
A total of 60 extracted single-rooted permanent teeth with intact roots, mature apices, and minimal canal curvature (≤15°) will be selected according to predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. After disinfection and sterilization, the teeth will be mounted in resin blocks to ensure stability during instrumentation. The samples will then be randomly allocated into two equal groups (n = 30 each) using a computer-generated randomization method.
Standard access cavities will be prepared for all samples. Canal patency and initial working length will be determined using an electronic apex locator and confirmed with digital periapical radiographs. Silicone stoppers will be used to standardize reference points for all measurements.
In Group 1 (manual glide path group), glide path preparation will be performed using a size #10 stainless steel K-file with a watch-winding and gentle filing motion. In Group 2 (mechanical glide path group), glide path preparation will be carried out using rotary PathFile instruments in sequence with an engine-driven handpiece, following the manufacturer's recommendations. All procedures will be performed by a single operator to eliminate operator-related variability.
After completion of glide path preparation and canal shaping, the final working length will be re-determined using the same apex locator and radiographic methods. The difference between the initial and final working lengths will be measured in millimeters for each specimen and recorded as the primary outcome variable.
Statistical analysis will be performed using SPSS software. Descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation) will be calculated, and inferential analysis will include paired t-tests for within-group comparisons and independent t-tests for between-group comparisons, with a significance level set at p \< 0.05.
The results of this study are expected to provide evidence regarding which glide path preparation technique better preserves working length accuracy, thereby assisting clinicians in selecting optimal endodontic instrumentation protocols and improving treatment outcomes.
Interventions
- Procedure Manual Glide Path Preparation
Glide path is created using stainless steel K-files (size #10) with a watch-winding motion and gentle vertical filing to establish a smooth path from the canal orifice to the apex. - Procedure Mechanical Glide Path Preparation
Glide path is created using rotary PathFile instruments (#13 and #16) with an engine-driven handpiece, following manufacturer instructions to establish a smooth path from the canal orifice to the apex.
Primary outcome measures
- Accuracy of working length achievement in mm [Time frame: Six months]
Eligibility criteria
Inclusion criteria
Extracted permanent single-rooted teeth. Teeth with fully formed mature apices. Teeth with intact roots and no structural defects. Root canals with curvature less than 15 degrees. Teeth with patent canals allowing negotiation with a size #10 K-file.
Exclusion criteria
Teeth with caries, fractures, cracks, or root defects. Teeth with previous endodontic treatment. Teeth showing root resorption or calcified canals. Teeth with unusual root canal anatomy or multiple canals. Teeth with severe canal curvature greater than 15 degrees. Teeth with immature apices or open apices.
Criteria are shown verbatim from the registry (in English). Final eligibility is always assessed by the study center.
Healthy volunteers: Yes
Study design
- Allocation
- Randomized
- Model
- Parallel assignment
- Masking
- Single blind
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
Study locations
Center list to be confirmed — check the primary protocol.
Identifiers
NCT: NCT07612228 · SOD/ERB/2025/72