Article

Comparison between a novel nickel-titanium alloy and 508 nitinol on the cyclic fatigue life of ProFile 25/.04 rotary instruments.

Department of Endodontics, Nova Southeastern University College of Dental Medicine, Health Professions Division, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33328, USA.
Journal of endodontics (Impact Factor: 2.95). 11/2008; 34(11):1406-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2008.07.029
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT ProFile 25/.04 instruments manufactured from three variants of Nitinol (1A, 1B & 2AS) were compared with stock production ProFile 25/.04 instruments and fatigue tested to failure. Cyclic fatigue testing was performed by rotating instruments at 300 RPM in a simulated steel root canal with 5 mm radius and 90 degrees curve until instrument separation. Time to failure was recorded. Torsion testing was undertaken by clamping 3 mm of each instrument tip between brass plates and rotating it at 2 RPM until failure. Data were recorded for torque and angle at fracture. Statistical differences were found with nickel-titanium variant 1B (M-Wire NiTi) nearly 400% more resistant to cyclic fatigue than stock ProFile 25/.04 (P < .001). Torsion testing found differences between all 508 Nitinol groups and M-Wire NiTi (P < .001). ProFile 25/.04 files manufactured from M-Wire NiTi have significantly greater resistance to cyclic fatigue while maintaining comparable torsional properties.

2 Bookmarks
 · 
207 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction The purpose of this study was to compare peak torque and force between ProTaper Universal (PTU) and ProTaper Next (PTN) instruments during the preparation of large and small root canals in extracted teeth. Methods Twelve maxillary incisors and each independent canal of 6 mesial roots of mandibular molars were randomly assigned to be prepared with a new set of either PTU or PTN instruments after a glide path was achieved. A total of 12 new sets of each instrument system were used. The tests were run in a standardized fashion in a torque-testing platform. Peak torques (Ncm) and force (N) were registered; analysis of variance and Tukey post hoc tests were then applied. Results Among instruments in the same sequence, no significant differences in peak torque and force were found among PTN instruments when shaping small or large root canals, but some PTU instruments showed statistically lower peak torque and force (P < .01) than others for both types of canals. Whereas PTU instruments showed significant differences in peak torque and force (P < .05) between large and small root canals, PTN instruments showed significantly lower force (P < .04) in large canals, but peak torque was not significantly different for upper central incisors or mesial mandibular root canals. Conclusions Under the conditions of this study, instruments in ProTaper Next set showed greater regularity in peak torque for small and large canals than ProTaper Universal instruments.
    Journal of Endodontics. 01/2014;
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study compared the canal curvature modifications after instrumentation with One Shape (Micro Mega) rotary file and Wave One primary reciprocating file (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland). Thirty International Organization for Standardization 15, 0.02 taper, Endo Training Blocks (Dentsply Maillefer) were used. In all specimens working length (WL) was established at the reference point 0. Glide path was achieved with Path-File 1, 2 and 3 (Dentsply Maillefer) at the WL. Group 1 were shaped with One Shape file and group 2 with Wave One files. Pre and post-digital images were superimposed, processed with Corel draw Graphic Suite X5 (Corel Corporation, Ottawa, Canada), Adobe Photoshop CS3 (Adobe Systems Inc., San Jose, CA) and Solid works student Edition software (Dassault Systems Solid Works Corp, S.A., Velizy, France). Mean was more for Wave One compared with One Shape. One-way ANOVA and t-test showed a significant difference between One Shape and Wave One at 5% level of significance (P < 0.05). Canals prepared with Wave One file preserved canal shape, respected the anatomical shape of J-shaped canal and produced a continuously tapered funnel.
    Journal of Conservative Dentistry 03/2014; 17(2):138-41.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: More information regarding the ability of single files to maintain the original canal position is required before adopting a single-file approach to cleaning and shaping. This study compares apical transportation in curved root canals when instrumenting with a single WaveOne (WO) file (Dentsply Tulsa Dental Specialties, Tulsa, OK) in a reciprocating motion with that incurred when using a sequence of Twisted Files (TFs; SybronEndo, Orange, CA) in a continuous rotating motion. Forty mesial canals of mandibular molars were evenly allocated into 2 balanced groups (n = 20) with a 17-mm average canal length and 20° average curvature. Canals were accessed in a conventional manner and instrumentation was completed with a single WO file or a series of TFs. The canals were instrumented according to the manufacturers' protocol. Apical transportation was assessed on a comparison of the pre- and postinstrumentation micro-computed tomographic scans at 1-, 2-, 3-, 4-, and 5-mm sections. One-way analysis of variance was performed to assess if a significant difference between systems exists. No significant difference (P > .05) was found between the WO and TF groups. Transportation in the mesial direction was of greater magnitude than distal transportation for both files systems. The mean transportation in the mesial direction was 100.1 ± 8.8 μm (WO group) and 101.0 ± 10.9 μm (TF group) (P = .5), whereas distal transportation was found to be 80.9 ± 14.6 μm (WO group) and 60.3 ± 11.0 μm (TF group) (P = .3). The results suggest that no difference exists between the WO file system and the conventional multifile TF system when considering apical transportation in curved canals.
    Journal of endodontics 05/2014; 40(5):717-20. · 2.95 Impact Factor

Full-text

View
4 Downloads
Available from