World Journal of Dentistry

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Volume  15 (2024)
Volume  14 (2023)
Volume  13 (2022)
Volume  12 (2021)
Volume  11 (2020)
Volume  10 (2019)
Volume  9 (2018)
Volume  8 (2017)
Volume  7 (2016)
Volume  6 (2015)
Volume  5 (2014)
Volume  4 (2013)
Volume  3 (2012)
Volume  2 (2011)
Volume  1 (2010)
Related articles

VOLUME 11 , ISSUE 3 ( May-June, 2020 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

A Comprehensive In Vitro Comparison of Mechanical Properties of Two Rotary Endodontic Instruments

Keywords : Clinical use, Endodontic, F-One blue, NiTi files, Protaper gold

Citation Information : A Comprehensive In Vitro Comparison of Mechanical Properties of Two Rotary Endodontic Instruments. World J Dent 2020; 11 (3):185-188.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-1729

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 03-10-2020

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2020; The Author(s).


Abstract

Aim: The aim of the present study was to compare two different nickel–titanium (NiTi) rotary files, F-One Blue and F2 Protaper Gold (PTG), evaluating their properties such as cyclic fatigue resistance, torsional resistance, and bending properties. Materials and methods: Sixty F-One Blue (25.06) and 60 PTGF2 have been randomly divided into 3 groups of 20 instruments each. Each group was tested in a different way, in order to analyze three different properties: cyclic fatigue resistance, torsional resistance, and flexibility. Cyclic fatigue resistance was evaluated by inserting the instruments for 16 mm in a stainless-steel artificial canal with a 90° angle and 5 mm of curvature with recommended speed and torque. Time to fracture was recorded using a chronometer (1/100 seconds). The number of cycles to fracture (NCF) was then calculated. Fragments were collected, and their lengths were measured. Torsional resistance was evaluated on the apical 3 mm of each of the files to calculate torque to fracture (TtF) using an endodontic motor (KaVo, Biberach, Germany), which automatically recorded the torque values every 1/10 s. All instruments were rotated at the same speed (300 rpm) and torque value (5.5 Ncm). Flexibility was evaluated using a calibrated load cell supported by a computer program. All the collected data were statistically analyzed (t-test) with a significance level set at 5%. Results: A significant difference in terms of cyclic fatigue resistance, torsional resistance, and flexibility between F-One Blue and F2 PTG was found (p < 0.05). The mean value of NCF was 604.16 (SD ± 23.32) for F-One Blue and 300.5 (SD 19.92) for F2 PTG. The mean value of TtF was 1.41 Ncm (SD ± 0.01) and 1.39 Ncm (SD ± 0.01) for F2 PTG. The mean value of bending test was 29 gcm (SD ± 1.15) for F-One Blue and 50 gcm (SD ± 2.30) for F2 PTG. Conclusion: F-One Blue better resists to flexural and torsional stresses and seemed to be more flexible. Since F-One Blue mechanical tested performances were better than the F2 PTG ones, these instruments should be considered a very promising instrument. Clinical significance: As evidenced by the results of this study, F-One Blue should be considered a very promising instrument that could improve endodontic clinical practice.

HTML PDF Share
  1. Kottoor J, Velmurugan N, Gopikrishna V, et al. Effects of multiple root canal usage on the surface topography and fracture of two different Ni-Ti rotary file systems. Indian J Dent Res 2013;24(1):42–47. DOI: 10.4103/0970-9290.114942.
  2. Gambarini G, Miccoli G, Seracchiani M, et al. Fatigue resistance of new and used nickel-titanium rotary instruments: a comparative study. Clin Ter 2018;169(3):e96–e101. DOI: 10.7417/T.2018.2061.
  3. Segato AVK, Piasecki L, Felipe Iparraguirre Nuñovero M, et al. The accuracy of a new cone-beam computed tomographic software in the preoperative working length determination ex vivo. J Endod 2018;44(6):1024–1029. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2018.02.027.
  4. Valenti-Obino F, Di Nardo D, Quero L, et al. Symmetry of root and root canal morphology of mandibular incisors: a cone-beam computed tomography study. J Clin Exp Dent 2019;11(6):e527–e533. DOI: 10.4317/jced.55629.
  5. Gambarini G, Tucci E, Bedini R, et al. The effect of brushing motion on the cyclic fatigue of rotary nickel titanium instruments. Ann Ist Super Sanita 2010;46(4):400–404. DOI: 10.4415/ANN_10_04_07.
  6. Gambarini G, Piasecki L, Miccoli G, et al. Classification and cyclic fatigue evaluation of new kinematics for endodontic instruments. Aust Endod J 2019;45(2):154–162. DOI: 10.1111/aej.12294.
  7. Necchi S, Petrini L, Taschieri S, et al. A comparative computational analysis of the mechanical behavior of two nickel-titanium rotary endodontic instruments. J Endod 2010;36(8):1380–1384. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2010.03.026.
  8. Alcalde MP, Tanomaru-Filho M, Bramante CM, et al. Cyclic and torsional fatigue resistance of reciprocating single files manufactured by different nickel-titanium alloys. J Endod 2017;43(7):1186–1191. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2017.03.008.
  9. Yang YJ, Hou BX, Hou XM. Metallurgic behavior and mechanical property of nickel-titanium endodontic files made by 3 heat treatment techniques. Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi 2018;53(8):539–545. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1002-0098.2018.08.008.
  10. Plotino G, Giansiracusa Rubini A, Grande NM, et al. Cutting efficiency of reciproc and WaveOne reciprocating instruments. J Endod 2014;40(8):1228–1230. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2014.01.041.
  11. Gambarini G, Galli M, Seracchiani M, et al. In vivo evaluation of operative torque generated by two nickel-titanium rotary instruments during root canal preparation. Eur J Dent 2019;13(4): 556–562. DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1698369.
  12. Gambarini G, Seracchiani M, Piasecki L, et al. Measurement of torque generated during intracanal instrumentation in vivo. Int Endod J 2019;52(5):737–745. DOI: 10.1111/iej.13042.
  13. Gambarini G, Galli M, Di Nardo D, et al. Differences in cyclic fatigue lifespan between two different heat treated NiTi endodontic rotary instruments: WaveOne gold vs EdgeOne fire. J Clin Exp Dent 2019;11(7):e609–e613. DOI: 10.4317/jced.55839.
  14. Gambarini G, Miccoli G, D'Angelo M, et al. The relevance of operative torque and torsional resistance of nickel-titanium rotary instruments: a preliminary clinical investigation. Saudi Endod J 2020. in press.
  15. Di Nardo D, Gambarini G, Seracchiani M, et al. Influence of different cross-section on cyclic fatigue resistance of two nickel–titanium rotary instruments with same heat treatment: an in vitro study. Saudi Endod J 2020. in press.
  16. Ebihara A, Yahata Y, Miyara K, et al. Heat treatment of nickel-titanium rotary endodontic instruments: Effects on bending properties and shaping abilities. Int Endod J 2011;44(9):843–849. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2011.01891.x.
  17. Miccoli G, Gaimari G, Seracchiani M, et al. Resistance to fracture of two nickel-titanium rotary instruments made with different thermal treatments. Ann Stomatol (Roma) 2017;8(2):53–58. DOI: 10.11138/ads/2017.8.2.059.
  18. Basheer Ahamed SB, Vanajassun PP, Rajkumar K, et al. Comparative evaluation of stress distribution in experimentally designed nickel-titanium rotary files with varying cross sections: a finite element analysis. J Endod 2018;44(4):654–658. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2017. 12.013.
  19. Pedullà E, Plotino G, Scibilia M, et al. Cyclic fatigue comparison among endodontic instruments with similar cross section and different surface coating. Minerva Stomatol 2019;68(2):67–73. DOI: 10.23736/S0026-4970.17.04009-2.
  20. Grande NM, Plotino G, Pecci R, et al. Cyclic fatigue resistance and three-dimensional analysis of instruments from two nickel-titanium rotary systems. Int Endod J 2006;39(10):755–763. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2006.01143.x.
  21. Plotino G, Grande NM, Cordaro M, et al. Measurement of the trajectory of different NiTi rotary instruments in an artificial canal specifically designed for cyclic fatigue tests. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2009;108(3):e152–e156. DOI: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2009.05.046.
  22. Pedullà E, La Rosa GRM, Virgillito C, et al. Cyclic fatigue resistance of nickel-titanium rotary instruments according to the angle of file access and radius of root canal. J Endod 2020;46(3):431–436. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2019.11.015.
  23. Gambarini G, Miccoli G, Seracchiani M, et al. Role of the flat-designed surface in improving the cyclic fatigue resistance of endodontic NiTi rotary instruments. Materials (Basel) 2019;12(16):2523.
  24. Özyürek T, Gündoğar M, Yılmaz K, et al. Bending resistance and cyclic fatigue life of reciproc blue, WaveOne gold, and genius files in a double (S-shaped) curved canal. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects 2017;11(4):241–246. DOI: 10.15171/joddd.2017.042.
  25. Modesto TC, Acosta ECP, Resende PD, et al. Cyclic flexural fatigue resistance of NiTi controlled memory and blue technology instruments after torsional preloading. J Appl Oral Sci 2018;26(0):e20180144. DOI: 10.1590/1678-7757-2018-0144.
  26. Özyürek T, Uslu G, Gündoğar M, et al. Comparison of cyclic fatigue resistance and bending properties of two reciprocating nickel-titanium glide path files. Int Endod J 2018;51(9):1047–1052. DOI: 10.1111/iej.12911.
  27. De-Deus G, Leal Vieira VT, Nogueira da Silva EJ, et al. Bending resistance and dynamic and static cyclic fatigue life of reciproc and WaveOne large instruments. J Endod 2014;40(4):575–579. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2013.10.013.
  28. Campbell L, Shen Y, Zhou HM, et al. Effect of fatigue on torsional failure of nickel-titanium controlled memory instruments. J Endod 2014;40(4):562–565. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2013.12.035.
  29. Di Nardo D, Galli M, Morese A, et al. A comparative study of mechanical resistance of two reciprocating files. J Clin Exp Dent 2019;11(3):e231–e235. DOI: 10.4317/jced.55487.
  30. Alqedairi A, Alfawaz H, Abualjadayel B, et al. Torsional resistance of three Protaper rotary systems. BMC Oral Health 2019;19(1):124. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-019-0820-7.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.