Abstract:Background Access cavity preparation is a crucial step in nonsurgical root canal treatment. Recent advancements in access cavity designs focus on preserving maximum tooth structure while ensuring sufficient access to canal orifices for effective cleaning and shaping, resulting in minimally invasive procedures. However, there is limited information on the impact of three-dimensional (3D)-guided access cavity preparation in molars. A literature review found no prior studies comparing the effects of various access cavity preparation techniques on apical transportation, untouched surfaces, and debris formation within the canal. Objective The objective of this study is to compare and evaluate the effects of three different access cavity techniques on apical transportation, untouched surfaces, and debris formation within the root canal. Material and methods Thirty extracted permanent mandibular first molars were selected and randomly assigned to three groups for this study: Group I received 3D-printed static guided cavity preparation, Group II underwent conservative access cavity preparation, and Group III was subjected to traditional access cavity (TAC) preparation. The mesial canals in all samples were cleaned and shaped using TruNatomy files. Preoperative and postoperative micro-CT imaging was performed on each sample to assess the effects of the different access cavity preparation techniques on apical transportation, untouched surfaces, and debris formation within the root canal. Results The study found that Group I, which used 3D-printed static guided cavity preparation, exhibited significantly less apical transportation compared to Groups II and III, with mean differences of -0.1677 and -0.2079, respectively. Debris accumulation was similar across all groups, with mean values of 0.928 ± 0.824 for Group I, 0.751 ± 0.495 for Group II, and 0.938 ± 0.681 for Group III, indicating no significant impact of cavity preparation type on debris levels. For untouched canal surfaces, Group III (TAC preparation) had the fewest untouched surfaces, with mean differences of 3.0380 and 3.9020 compared to Groups II and I, respectively. Conclusions While TAC preparation reduces substantial tooth structure, it shows higher instrumentation efficacy and better cleaning of the root canal system. However, in complex cases where tooth structure preservation is crucial, guided access cavity preparation provides an effective balance between structural conservation and adequate canal access. This approach offers a tailored solution, optimizing treatment outcomes based on the specific clinical scenario.

Root canal preparation efficiency of protaper vs. combined technique in simulated resin root canal

[Comparison of the ability of four different kinds of nickel-titanium instruments to prepare simulated resin to simulate curved root canal forming]

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF APICAL EXTRUSION OF DEBRIS AND SHAPING ABILITY IN CURVED ROOT CANALS USING FOUR DIFFERENT NITI INSTRUMENTS

[Comparison of the Shaping Capability of Reciprocating Instruments in Simulated Canals in Vitro].

A Comparative Study of Antimicrobial Efficacy of Three Different Instruments and Mechanical Preparation Techniques in Single Infected Root Canals

The efficacy of ProTaper rotary NiTi and stainless hand instruments to remove gutta-percha from root canals: an ex vivo study

Study of C-Shaped Root Canals in Mandibular Second Molars in Vitro

Assessment of Shaping Ability of ProTaper in Curved Canals

A clinical comparation of the shaping abilities of the two types of rotary nickel-titanium instruments in molar canals

Shaping ability of R-phase nickel-titanium rotary instruments in simulated S-shaped canals

Gentlefile Versus Protaper in the Shaping Ability in Simulated J-shaped Root Canals

Comparative Evaluation of Three Access Cavity Preparation Techniques on Root Canal Instrumentation Using Micro-CT: An In Vitro Study

Comparison of the incidences of apical root cracks after canal preparation with two nickel-titanium rotary systems:an in vitro study

Comparison between two types of rotary NiTi instruments in root canal preparation:a clinical study

Shaping ability of novel nickel-titanium systems in printed primary molars

Cone-beam computed tomographic analysis of apical transportation and centering ratio of ProTaper and XP-endo Shaper NiTi rotary systems in curved canals: an in vitro study

Effect of Different Preparation Techniques on Root Canal Geometry: An In Vitro Study

Evaluation of root canal preparation using two nickel–titanium instrument systems via cone-beam computed tomography

Evaluation of apical extrusion of debris and centering ability in different nickel-titanium files during curved root canal preparation

[Glide Path Management of Rotary Nickel-Titanium Instruments in Simulated Root Canals].

Comparison of Two Post Preparation Methods in Mandibular Second Molars with a C-shaped Root Canal Configuration.