1. Adıgüzel M, Capar ID. Comparison of cyclic fatigue resistance of WaveOne and WaveOne Gold small, primary, and large instruments. J Endod. 2017; 43:623–627.
2. Topçuoğlu HS, Topçuoğlu G. Cyclic fatigue resistance of Reciproc Blue and Reciproc files in an s-shaped canal. J Endod. 2017; 43:1679–1682.
3. Keskin C, Inan U, Demiral M, Keleş A. Cyclic fatigue resistance of Reciproc Blue, Reciproc, and WaveOne Gold reciprocating instruments. J Endod. 2017; 43:1360–1363.
4. Adigüzel M, Turgay B. Comparison of the cyclic fatigue resistance of Reciproc and Reciproc Blue nickel-titanium instruments in artificial canals with single and double (S-shaped) curvatures. Eur Endod J. 2017; 2:32.
5. Yilmaz A, Kucukay ES, Istektepe M, Sisli SN, Ersev H, Karagoz-Kucukay I. Comparison of the shaping ability of WaveOne Reciprocating files with or without glide path in simulated curved S-shaped root canals. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent. 2017; 7:S13–S17.
6. Patiño PV, Biedma BM, Liébana CR, Cantatore G, Bahillo JG. The influence of a manual glide path on the separation rate of NiTi rotary instruments. J Endod. 2005; 31:114–116.
7. Berutti E, Negro AR, Lendini M, Pasqualini D. Influence of manual preflaring and torque on the failure rate of ProTaper rotary instruments. J Endod. 2004; 30:228–230.
8. Paleker F, van der Vyver PJ. Glide path enlargement of mandibular molar canals by using K-Files, the ProGlider File, and G-Files: a comparative study of the preparation times. J Endod. 2017; 43:609–612.
9. Coelho MS, Fontana CE, Kato AS, de Martin AS, da Silveira Bueno CE. Effects of glide path on the centering ability and preparation time of two reciprocating instruments. Iran Endod J. 2016; 11:33–37.
10. Lopes HP, Elias CN, Siqueira JF Jr, Soares RG, Souza LC, Oliveira JC, Lopes WS, Mangelli M. Mechanical behavior of pathfinding endodontic instruments. J Endod. 2012; 38:1417–1421.
11. Keskin C, İnan U, Demiral M, Keleş A. Cyclic fatigue resistance of R-Pilot, WaveOne Gold Glider, and ProGlider glide path instruments. Clin Oral Investig. 2018.
12. De-Deus G, Arruda TE, Souza EM, Neves A, Magalhães K, Thuanne E, Fidel RA. The ability of the Reciproc R25 instrument to reach the full root canal working length without a glide path. Int Endod J. 2013; 46:993–998.
13. Bartols A, Robra BP, Walther W. The ability of Reciproc instruments to reach full working length without glide path preparation: a clinical retrospective study. PeerJ. 2017; 5:e3583.
14. Schneider SW. A comparison of canal preparations in straight and curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1971; 32:271–275.
15. Aydin U, Karataslioglu E. Evaluation of canal transportation after preparation with Reciproc single-file systems with or without glide path files. J Conserv Dent. 2017; 20:230–233.
16. Rodrigues E, De-Deus G, Souza E, Silva EJ. Safe mechanical preparation with reciprocation movement without glide path creation: result from a pool of 673 root canals. Braz Dent J. 2016; 27:22–27.
17. De-Deus G, Silva EJ, Vieira VT, Belladonna FG, Elias CN, Plotino G, Grande NM. Blue thermomechanical treatment optimizes fatigue resistance and flexibility of the Reciproc files. J Endod. 2017; 43:462–466.
18. Özyürek T, Gündoğar M, Uslu G, Yılmaz K, Staffoli S, Nm G, Plotino G, Polimeni A. Cyclic fatigue resistances of Hyflex EDM, WaveOne Gold, Reciproc Blue and 2shape NiTi rotary files in different artificial canals. Odontology. 2018; 106:408–413.
19. Peters OA, Peters CI, Schönenberger K, Barbakow F. ProTaper rotary root canal preparation: assessment of torque and force in relation to canal anatomy. Int Endod J. 2003; 36:93–99.
20. Berutti E, Cantatore G, Castellucci A, Chiandussi G, Pera F, Migliaretti G, Pasqualini D. Use of nickel-titanium rotary PathFile to create the glide path: comparison with manual preflaring in simulated root canals. J Endod. 2009; 35:408–412.