COMPARISON OF FOUR DIFFERENT ENDODONTIC ROTARY SYSTEMS IN TERMS OF CYCLIC FATIGUE

Ahter Şanal Çıkman; Tolga Ceyhanlı

doi:10.7126/cumudj.1032472

Research Article

COMPARISON OF FOUR DIFFERENT ENDODONTIC ROTARY SYSTEMS IN TERMS OF CYCLIC FATIGUE

Year 2022, Volume: 25 Issue: Supplement, 124 - 129, 25.03.2022

Ahter Şanal Çıkman , Tolga Ceyhanlı

https://doi.org/10.7126/cumudj.1032472

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare four endodontic rotary systems in terms of cyclic fatigue.
Material and Methods: 25/.08 Twisted File (TF), TF Adaptive, Reciproc and WaveOne rotary files were used to test the cyclic fatigue strength in this study. Four different artificial canals, compatible with the file size and taper, were created, with the curvature angle and radius of 450-2 mm, 600-2 mm, 450-5 mm and 600-5 mm, respectively. The front surface of the artificial canals was covered with a removable glass plate. The files were operated in the canals according to their own working principles until they fractured. The fracture time was determined by using a chronometer with 1/100 second accuracy and the cyclic fatigue strength was evaluated according to the time until fracture occurs. A total of 40 files, 10 in each canal, were used in each group. SPSS program was used for statistical analysis. Mann-Whitney U test was applied for pairwise comparisons. Bonferroni correction was applied and P<0.008 was considered as statistically significant.
Results: In all canals, fracture time was the highest for Reciproc files, followed by WaveOne, TF Adaptive and TF files, respectively. For the canal curvature of 450-2 mm, the Reciproc files were significantly more resistant to fracture than the others. While there was no significant difference between TF Adaptive and TF, WaveOne was significantly more resistant than both groups. In canals with the curvature of 600-2 mm and 450-5 mm Reciproc and WaveOne were significantly more resistant to fracture than TF Adaptive and TF. In addition, TF Adaptive was significantly more resistant than TF. For the curvature of 600-5 mm, the difference between all groups was significant.
Conclusions: Regardless of the canal curvature, the Reciproc exhibited the highest cyclic fatigue strength, while the TF showed the lowest fatigue strength.

Keywords

Rotary file, cyclic fatigue, continuous rotation, reciprocation, adaptive motion

Project Number

TDK-2015-5185

References

1. Gavini G, Pessoa OF, Barletta FB, Vasconcellos M, Caldeira CL. Cyclic fatigue resistance of rotary nickel-titanium instruments submitted to nitrogen ion implantation. J Endod 2010;36(7):1183-86.
2. Yum J, Cheung GS-P, Park J-K, Hur B, Kim H-C. Torsional strength and toughness of nickel-titanium rotary files. J Endod 2011;37(3):382-86.
3. Ankrum MT, Hartwell GR, Truitt JE. K3 Endo, ProTaper, and ProFile systems: breakage and distortion in severely curved roots of molars. J Endod 2004;30(4):234-37.
4. Sattapan B, Nervo GJ, Palamara JE, Messer HH. Defects in rotary nickel-titanium files after clinical use. J Endod 2000;26(3):161-65.
5. Parashos P, Gordon I, Messer HH. Factors influencing defects of rotary nickel-titanium endodontic instruments after clinical use. J Endod 2004;30(10):722-25.
6. Parashos P, Messer HH. Rotary NiTi instrument fracture and its consequences. J Endod 2006;32(11):1031-43.
7. Capar ID, Ertas H, Arslan H. Comparison of cyclic fatigue resistance of novel nickel‐titanium rotary instruments. Aust Endod J 2015;41(1):24-28.
8. Gao Y, Shotton V, Wilkinson K, Phillips G, Johnson WB. Effects of raw material and rotational speed on the cyclic fatigue of ProFile Vortex rotary instruments. J Endod 2010;36(7):1205-09.
9. Bhagabati N, Yadav S, Talwar S. An in vitro cyclic fatigue analysis of different endodontic nickel-titanium rotary instruments. J Endod 2012;38(4):515-18.
10. You S-Y, Bae K-S, Baek S-H, et al. Lifespan of one nickel-titanium rotary file with reciprocating motion in curved root canals. J Endod 2010;36(12):1991-94.
11. De‐Deus G, Moreira E, Lopes H, Elias C. Extended cyclic fatigue life of F2 ProTaper instruments used in reciprocating movement. Int Endod J 2010;43(12):1063-68.
12. Yared G. Canal preparation using one reciprocating instrument without prior hand filing: A new concept. Int Dent SA 2011;2:78-87.
13. Kim H-C, Kwak S-W, Cheung GS-P, et al. Cyclic fatigue and torsional resistance of two new nickel-titanium instruments used in reciprocation motion: Reciproc versus WaveOne. J Endod 2012;38(4):541-44.
14. Webber J, Machtou P, Pertot W, et al. The WaveOne single-file reciprocating system. Roots 2011;1(1):28-33.
15. Mounce RE. Blended endodontic elegance and simplicity: the single twisted file preparation and matching RealSeal one obturator. Int Dent SA 2010;12:40-8.
16. Gambarini G, Glassman G. TF adaptive: a novel approach to nickel-titanium instrumentation. Oral Health 2013;7(2):22-30.
17. Plotino G, Grande NM, Cordaro M, Testarelli L, Gambarini G. A review of cyclic fatigue testing of nickel-titanium rotary instruments. J Endod 2009;35(11):1469-76.
18. Grande N, Plotino G, Falanga A, Somma F. A new device for cyclic fatigue testing of NiTi rotary endodontic instruments: R60. Int Endod J 2005;38(12).
19. Plotino G, Grande NM, Cordaro M, Testarelli L, Gambarini G. 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 Endodontol 2009;108(3):e152-e56.
20. Pruett JP, Clement DJ, Carnes Jr DL. Cyclic fatigue testing of nickel-titanium endodontic instruments. J Endod 1997;23(2):77-85.
21. Martin B, Zelada G, Varela P, et al. Factors influencing the fracture of nickel-titanium rotary instruments. Int Endod J 2003;36(4):262-66.
22. Haikel Y, Serfaty R, Bateman G, Senger B, Allemann C. Dynamic and cyclic fatigue of engine-driven rotary nickel-titanium endodontic instruments. J Endod 1999;25(6):434-40.
23. Inan U, Aydin C, Tunca YM. Cyclic fatigue of ProTaper rotary nickel-titanium instruments in artificial canals with 2 different radii of curvature. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endodontol 2007;104(6):837-40.
24. Grande N, 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):755-63.
25. Pérez-Higueras JJ, Arias A, José C. Cyclic fatigue resistance of K3, K3XF, and twisted file nickel-titanium files under continuous rotation or reciprocating motion. J Endod 2013;39(12):1585-88.
26. Lee W, Hwang YJ, You SY, Kim HC. Effect of reciprocation usage of nickel‐titanium rotary files on the cyclic fatigue resistance. Aust Endod J 2013;39(3):146-50.
27. Gambarini G, Plotino G, Piasecki L, et al. Deformations and cyclic fatigue resistance of nickel-titanium instruments inside a sequence. Ann Stomatol 2015;6(1):6.
28. Vadhana S, SaravanaKarthikeyan B, Nandini S, Velmurugan N. Cyclic fatigue resistance of RaCe and Mtwo rotary files in continuous rotation and reciprocating motion. J Endod 2014;40(7):995-99.
29. Lopes HP, Elias CN, Vieira MV, et al. Fatigue life of Reciproc and Mtwo instruments subjected to static and dynamic tests. J Endod 2013;39(5):693-96.
30. Gambarini G, Grande NM, Plotino G, et al. Fatigue resistance of engine-driven rotary nickel-titanium instruments produced by new manufacturing methods. J Endod 2008;34(8):1003-05.
31. Castelló-Escrivá R, Alegre-Domingo T, Faus-Matoses V, Román-Richon S, Faus-Llácer VJ. In vitro comparison of cyclic fatigue resistance of ProTaper, WaveOne, and Twisted Files. J Endod 2012;38(11):1521-24.
32. Pedullà E, Grande NM, Plotino G, Gambarini G, Rapisarda E. Influence of continuous or reciprocating motion on cyclic fatigue resistance of 4 different nickel-titanium rotary instruments. J Endod 2013;39(2):258-61.
33. Saber SEDM, El Sadat SMA. Effect of altering the reciprocation range on the fatigue life and the shaping ability of WaveOne nickel-titanium instruments. J Endod 2013;39(5):685-88.
34. Gambarini G, Rubini AG, Al Sudani D, et al. Influence of different angles of reciprocation on the cyclic fatigue of nickel-titanium endodontic instruments. J Endod 2012;38(10):1408-11.
35. Higuera O, Plotino G, Tocci L, et al. Cyclic fatigue resistance of 3 different nickel-titanium reciprocating instruments in artificial canals. J Endod 2015;41(6):913-15.
36. Özyürek T, Keskin NB, Furuncuoğlu F, İnan U. Comparison of cyclic fatigue life of nickel-titanium files: an examination using high-speed camera. Restor Dent Endod 2017;42(3):224-31.
37. Plotino G, Grande N, Testarelli L, Gambarini G. Cyclic fatigue of Reciproc and WaveOne reciprocating instruments. Int Endod J 2012;45(7):614-18.
38. Sekar V, Kumar R, Nandini S, Ballal S, Velmurugan N. Assessment of the role of cross section on fatigue resistance of rotary files when used in reciprocation. Eur J Dent 2016;10(04):541-45.

Year 2022, Volume: 25 Issue: Supplement, 124 - 129, 25.03.2022

Ahter Şanal Çıkman , Tolga Ceyhanlı

https://doi.org/10.7126/cumudj.1032472

Abstract

Supporting Institution

Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi Proje Birimi

Project Number

TDK-2015-5185

References

1. Gavini G, Pessoa OF, Barletta FB, Vasconcellos M, Caldeira CL. Cyclic fatigue resistance of rotary nickel-titanium instruments submitted to nitrogen ion implantation. J Endod 2010;36(7):1183-86.
2. Yum J, Cheung GS-P, Park J-K, Hur B, Kim H-C. Torsional strength and toughness of nickel-titanium rotary files. J Endod 2011;37(3):382-86.
3. Ankrum MT, Hartwell GR, Truitt JE. K3 Endo, ProTaper, and ProFile systems: breakage and distortion in severely curved roots of molars. J Endod 2004;30(4):234-37.
4. Sattapan B, Nervo GJ, Palamara JE, Messer HH. Defects in rotary nickel-titanium files after clinical use. J Endod 2000;26(3):161-65.
5. Parashos P, Gordon I, Messer HH. Factors influencing defects of rotary nickel-titanium endodontic instruments after clinical use. J Endod 2004;30(10):722-25.
6. Parashos P, Messer HH. Rotary NiTi instrument fracture and its consequences. J Endod 2006;32(11):1031-43.
7. Capar ID, Ertas H, Arslan H. Comparison of cyclic fatigue resistance of novel nickel‐titanium rotary instruments. Aust Endod J 2015;41(1):24-28.
8. Gao Y, Shotton V, Wilkinson K, Phillips G, Johnson WB. Effects of raw material and rotational speed on the cyclic fatigue of ProFile Vortex rotary instruments. J Endod 2010;36(7):1205-09.
9. Bhagabati N, Yadav S, Talwar S. An in vitro cyclic fatigue analysis of different endodontic nickel-titanium rotary instruments. J Endod 2012;38(4):515-18.
10. You S-Y, Bae K-S, Baek S-H, et al. Lifespan of one nickel-titanium rotary file with reciprocating motion in curved root canals. J Endod 2010;36(12):1991-94.
11. De‐Deus G, Moreira E, Lopes H, Elias C. Extended cyclic fatigue life of F2 ProTaper instruments used in reciprocating movement. Int Endod J 2010;43(12):1063-68.
12. Yared G. Canal preparation using one reciprocating instrument without prior hand filing: A new concept. Int Dent SA 2011;2:78-87.
13. Kim H-C, Kwak S-W, Cheung GS-P, et al. Cyclic fatigue and torsional resistance of two new nickel-titanium instruments used in reciprocation motion: Reciproc versus WaveOne. J Endod 2012;38(4):541-44.
14. Webber J, Machtou P, Pertot W, et al. The WaveOne single-file reciprocating system. Roots 2011;1(1):28-33.
15. Mounce RE. Blended endodontic elegance and simplicity: the single twisted file preparation and matching RealSeal one obturator. Int Dent SA 2010;12:40-8.
16. Gambarini G, Glassman G. TF adaptive: a novel approach to nickel-titanium instrumentation. Oral Health 2013;7(2):22-30.
17. Plotino G, Grande NM, Cordaro M, Testarelli L, Gambarini G. A review of cyclic fatigue testing of nickel-titanium rotary instruments. J Endod 2009;35(11):1469-76.
18. Grande N, Plotino G, Falanga A, Somma F. A new device for cyclic fatigue testing of NiTi rotary endodontic instruments: R60. Int Endod J 2005;38(12).
19. Plotino G, Grande NM, Cordaro M, Testarelli L, Gambarini G. 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 Endodontol 2009;108(3):e152-e56.
20. Pruett JP, Clement DJ, Carnes Jr DL. Cyclic fatigue testing of nickel-titanium endodontic instruments. J Endod 1997;23(2):77-85.
21. Martin B, Zelada G, Varela P, et al. Factors influencing the fracture of nickel-titanium rotary instruments. Int Endod J 2003;36(4):262-66.
22. Haikel Y, Serfaty R, Bateman G, Senger B, Allemann C. Dynamic and cyclic fatigue of engine-driven rotary nickel-titanium endodontic instruments. J Endod 1999;25(6):434-40.
23. Inan U, Aydin C, Tunca YM. Cyclic fatigue of ProTaper rotary nickel-titanium instruments in artificial canals with 2 different radii of curvature. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endodontol 2007;104(6):837-40.
24. Grande N, 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):755-63.
25. Pérez-Higueras JJ, Arias A, José C. Cyclic fatigue resistance of K3, K3XF, and twisted file nickel-titanium files under continuous rotation or reciprocating motion. J Endod 2013;39(12):1585-88.
26. Lee W, Hwang YJ, You SY, Kim HC. Effect of reciprocation usage of nickel‐titanium rotary files on the cyclic fatigue resistance. Aust Endod J 2013;39(3):146-50.
27. Gambarini G, Plotino G, Piasecki L, et al. Deformations and cyclic fatigue resistance of nickel-titanium instruments inside a sequence. Ann Stomatol 2015;6(1):6.
28. Vadhana S, SaravanaKarthikeyan B, Nandini S, Velmurugan N. Cyclic fatigue resistance of RaCe and Mtwo rotary files in continuous rotation and reciprocating motion. J Endod 2014;40(7):995-99.
29. Lopes HP, Elias CN, Vieira MV, et al. Fatigue life of Reciproc and Mtwo instruments subjected to static and dynamic tests. J Endod 2013;39(5):693-96.
30. Gambarini G, Grande NM, Plotino G, et al. Fatigue resistance of engine-driven rotary nickel-titanium instruments produced by new manufacturing methods. J Endod 2008;34(8):1003-05.
31. Castelló-Escrivá R, Alegre-Domingo T, Faus-Matoses V, Román-Richon S, Faus-Llácer VJ. In vitro comparison of cyclic fatigue resistance of ProTaper, WaveOne, and Twisted Files. J Endod 2012;38(11):1521-24.
32. Pedullà E, Grande NM, Plotino G, Gambarini G, Rapisarda E. Influence of continuous or reciprocating motion on cyclic fatigue resistance of 4 different nickel-titanium rotary instruments. J Endod 2013;39(2):258-61.
33. Saber SEDM, El Sadat SMA. Effect of altering the reciprocation range on the fatigue life and the shaping ability of WaveOne nickel-titanium instruments. J Endod 2013;39(5):685-88.
34. Gambarini G, Rubini AG, Al Sudani D, et al. Influence of different angles of reciprocation on the cyclic fatigue of nickel-titanium endodontic instruments. J Endod 2012;38(10):1408-11.
35. Higuera O, Plotino G, Tocci L, et al. Cyclic fatigue resistance of 3 different nickel-titanium reciprocating instruments in artificial canals. J Endod 2015;41(6):913-15.
36. Özyürek T, Keskin NB, Furuncuoğlu F, İnan U. Comparison of cyclic fatigue life of nickel-titanium files: an examination using high-speed camera. Restor Dent Endod 2017;42(3):224-31.
37. Plotino G, Grande N, Testarelli L, Gambarini G. Cyclic fatigue of Reciproc and WaveOne reciprocating instruments. Int Endod J 2012;45(7):614-18.
38. Sekar V, Kumar R, Nandini S, Ballal S, Velmurugan N. Assessment of the role of cross section on fatigue resistance of rotary files when used in reciprocation. Eur J Dent 2016;10(04):541-45.

There are 38 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language	English
Subjects	Health Care Administration
Journal Section	Original Research Articles
Authors	Ahter Şanal Çıkman 0000-0003-2145-5859 Tolga Ceyhanlı 0000-0002-7701-5329
Project Number	TDK-2015-5185
Publication Date	March 25, 2022
Submission Date	December 4, 2021
Published in Issue	Year 2022Volume: 25 Issue: Supplement

Cite

EndNote	Şanal Çıkman A, Ceyhanlı T (March 1, 2022) COMPARISON OF FOUR DIFFERENT ENDODONTIC ROTARY SYSTEMS IN TERMS OF CYCLIC FATIGUE. Cumhuriyet Dental Journal 25 Supplement 124–129.

Download Cover Image

Article Files

Full Text

Cumhuriyet Dental Journal (Cumhuriyet Dent J, CDJ) is the official publication of Cumhuriyet University Faculty of Dentistry. CDJ is an international journal dedicated to the latest advancement of dentistry. The aim of this journal is to provide a platform for scientists and academicians all over the world to promote, share, and discuss various new issues and developments in different areas of dentistry. First issue of the Journal of Cumhuriyet University Faculty of Dentistry was published in 1998. In 2010, journal's name was changed as Cumhuriyet Dental Journal. Journal’s publication language is English.

CDJ accepts articles in English. Submitting a paper to CDJ is free of charges. In addition, CDJ has not have article processing charges.

Frequency: Four times a year (March, June, September, and December)

IMPORTANT NOTICE

All users of Cumhuriyet Dental Journal should visit to their user's home page through the "https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/user" " or "https://dergipark.org.tr/en/user" links to update their incomplete information shown in blue or yellow warnings and update their e-mail addresses and information to the DergiPark system. Otherwise, the e-mails from the journal will not be seen or fall into the SPAM folder. Please fill in all missing part in the relevant field.

Please visit journal's AUTHOR GUIDELINE to see revised policy and submission rules to be held since 2020.