Comparison of five single-file systems in the preparation of severely curved root canals: an ex vivo study

BMC Oral Health

Table 4 The deviation of root canal transportation (mm) (n = 12)

Measuring levels	M3-L	Reciproc Blue	V-Taper 2H	WaveOne gold	XP-endo shaper	P value
P1	0.10 ± 0.02 (0.08, 0.05–0.14)	0.08 ± 0.02 (0.06, 0.03–0.12)	0.11 ± 0.02 (0.09, 0.04–0.18)	0.12 ± 0.02 (0.11, 0.05–0.19)	0.08 ± 0.02 (0.05, 0.02–0.11)	0.77
P2	0.12 ± 0.02 (0.12, 0.07–0.16)	0.16 ± 0.04 (0.10, 0.04–0.12)	0.16 ± 0.04 (0.06, 0.02–0.15)	0.010 ± 0.04 (0.08, 0.06–0.14)	0.08 ± 0.02 (0.07, 0.04–0.14)	0.48
P3	0.11 ± 0.02 (0.07, 0.04–0.18)	0.07 ± 0.02 (0.04, 0.02–0.12)	0.07 ± 0.02 (0.05, 0.02–0.13)	0.11 ± 0.02 (0.08, 0.06–0.17)	0.07 ± 0.02 (0.04, 0.03–0.12)	0.56
P4	0.19 ± 0.05^a (0.10, 0.08–0.30)	0.08 ± 0.03 (0.07, 0.02–0.14)	0.10 ± 0.04 (0.05, 0.04–0.15)	0.09 ± 0.02 (0.08, 0.06–0.14)	0.07 ± 0.02^b (0.05, 0.03–0.10)	0.03
P5	0.16 ± 0.05 (0.06, 0.05–0.28)	0.12 ± 0.02 (0.07, 0.06–0.16)	0.08 ± 0.03^a (0.05, 0.02–0.13)	0.20 ± 0.04^b (0.22, 0.11–0.29)	0.10 ± 0.02 (0.08, 0.05–0.17)	0.04
P6	0.16 ± 0.05 (0.11, 0.06–0.26)	0.10 ± 0.02 (0.08, 0.05–0.15)	0.10 ± 0.01 (0.11, 0.07–0.12)	0.16 ± 0.03 (0.14, 0.09–0.23)	0.09 ± 0.03 (0.07, 0.03–0.15)	0.33
P7	0.18 ± 0.05 (0.13, 0.07–0.29)	0.15 ± 0.03 (0.13, 0.08–0.22)	0.14 ± 0.05 (0.08, 0.02–0.26)	0.20 ± 0.05 (0.18, 0.11–0.31)	0.13 ± 0.05 (0.05, 0.02–0.24)	0.17
P value	0.70	0.13	0.69	0.28	0.96

P1–P3: 1-, 2-, 3-mm from apical foramen; P4: curved vertex; P5: initial point of bending; P6: The midpoint of P5 and P7; P7: root canal orifice.
Parameters non-normally distributed are presented with Mean ± SE (median, range)
No statistically significant difference was found within groups (Kruskal–Wallis test and Mann–Whitney test, P > 0.05 )
“a”and “b”: different letters in the same row indicated a statistically significant difference between groups (Kruskal–Wallis test and Mann–Whitney U test, P < 0.05 )

ISSN: 1472-6831