INTRODUCTION: This study evaluated the influence of cervical preflaring on the incidence of root dentin defects after root canal preparation. METHODS: Extracted human maxillary central incisors were selected and allocated to 1 control group and 12 experimental groups (n = 15). Teeth in the control group were left unprepared, whereas the others were prepared using 2 reciprocating single-file systems (Reciproc and WaveOne [WO]), 3 full-sequence rotary systems (ProTaper Universal, ProTaper Next [PTN], and ProFile), and K-files driven by an oscillatory system, with and without cervical preflaring. Roots were then horizontally sectioned at 4, 8, and 12 mm from the apex, stained with 1% methylene blue, and viewed through a stereomicroscope at ×25 magnification. Slices were inspected and the absence/presence of defects (fractures, partial cracks, and craze lines) recorded. Data were analyzed using Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Levene tests followed by the Tukey post hoc test at a significance level of P < .05. RESULTS: No root dentin defects were observed in the control group. WO was associated with a significantly higher number of defects than K-files, ProFile, and PTN (P < .05), but was not significantly different from Reciproc or ProTaper Universal (P > .05). Cervical preflaring significantly reduced the incidence of fractures and other defects in the WO and PTN groups (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: All instruments caused root dentin defects, regardless of the enlargement or not of the cervical portion. Cervical preflaring was associated with a lower incidence of defects, mainly in root canals prepared with WO and PTN.
INTRODUCTION: This study evaluated the influence of cervical preflaring on the incidence of root dentin defects after root canal preparation. METHODS: Extracted human maxillary central incisors were selected and allocated to 1 control group and 12 experimental groups (n = 15). Teeth in the control group were left unprepared, whereas the others were prepared using 2 reciprocating single-file systems (Reciproc and WaveOne [WO]), 3 full-sequence rotary systems (ProTaper Universal, ProTaper Next [PTN], and ProFile), and K-files driven by an oscillatory system, with and without cervical preflaring. Roots were then horizontally sectioned at 4, 8, and 12 mm from the apex, stained with 1% methylene blue, and viewed through a stereomicroscope at ×25 magnification. Slices were inspected and the absence/presence of defects (fractures, partial cracks, and craze lines) recorded. Data were analyzed using Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Levene tests followed by the Tukey post hoc test at a significance level of P < .05. RESULTS: No root dentin defects were observed in the control group. WO was associated with a significantly higher number of defects than K-files, ProFile, and PTN (P < .05), but was not significantly different from Reciproc or ProTaper Universal (P > .05). Cervical preflaring significantly reduced the incidence of fractures and other defects in the WO and PTN groups (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: All instruments caused root dentin defects, regardless of the enlargement or not of the cervical portion. Cervical preflaring was associated with a lower incidence of defects, mainly in root canals prepared with WO and PTN.