Journal of International Society of Preventive and Community Dentistry

REVIEW ARTICLE
Year
: 2016  |  Volume : 6  |  Issue : 5  |  Page : 402--409

Single file reciprocating systems: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature: Comparison of reciproc and WaveOne


Rana Alsilani1, Fatima Jadu2, Dania F Bogari3, Ahmed M Jan4, Turki Y Alhazzazi5 
1 Department of Dental, Batterjee Medical School, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
2 Department of Diagnostic Oral Sciences, King Abdulaziz University, Faculty of Dentistry, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
3 Department of Endodontics, King Abdulaziz University, Faculty of Dentistry, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
4 Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, King Abdulaziz University, Faculty of Dentistry, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
5 Department of Oral Biology, King Abdulaziz University, Faculty of Dentistry, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia

Correspondence Address:
Turki Y Alhazzazi
Department of Oral Biology, King Abdulaziz University, Faculty of Dentistry, Jeddah
Saudi Arabia

The introduction of single-file nickel-titanium (NiTi) reciprocating systems has been a major breakthrough in the field of endodontics. Thus, the aim of this study was to compare the available reciprocating systems, Reciproc and WaveOne, using a meta-analysis with different parameters. A comprehensive electronic literature search for Reciproc and WaveOne using PubMed and Google scholar was initially conducted in September 2014 and updated in September 2016. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were then established. Twenty-six studies were qualified for the systematic review, and only three studies were considered for the meta-analysis using cyclic fatigue resistance as the main parameter. The time to fracture for the Reciproc and WaveOne systems ranged from 119.7 sec to 156.4 sec and 74.8 sec to 99.6 sec, respectively. The pooled difference in mean time to fracture was longer for the Reciproc system by 45.6 sec. This difference was statistically significantly at P value < 0.001. In conclusion, our study supports the finding that Reciproc is more resistant to cyclic fatigue than WaveOne. However, with regard to other parameters, mixed results were obtained. Well-designed randomized clinical trials comparing both systems under the same experimental conditions should be done in future studies.


How to cite this article:
Alsilani R, Jadu F, Bogari DF, Jan AM, Alhazzazi TY. Single file reciprocating systems: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature: Comparison of reciproc and WaveOne.J Int Soc Prevent Communit Dent 2016;6:402-409


How to cite this URL:
Alsilani R, Jadu F, Bogari DF, Jan AM, Alhazzazi TY. Single file reciprocating systems: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature: Comparison of reciproc and WaveOne. J Int Soc Prevent Communit Dent [serial online] 2016 [cited 2022 Oct 4 ];6:402-409
Available from: https://www.jispcd.org/article.asp?issn=2231-0762;year=2016;volume=6;issue=5;spage=402;epage=409;aulast=Alsilani;type=0