Shaping effectiveness and surface topography of reciprocating files after multiple simulated uses
Source abstract
Abstract
This in vitro study assessed morphological changes and efficiency of reciprocating files after multiple uses. Sixty standardized Endo Training Blocks and 10 ReciprocR25 files were selected (six blocks for each file). Each file was its own control (before use vs. after each instrumentation). The instruments were used according to the manufacturer's instructions, and scanning electron microscopy was used to observe fatigue cracks, metal strips/metal flash, pitting, fretting, debris, disruption of the cutting edge, and plastic deformations after each instrumentation. The presence of seven wear variables was scored semiquantitatively by viewing micrographs collected before and after use. The prepared areas in resin blocks were calculated and compared by using AutoCAD software. The control group had significantly lower values for all wear variables except fretting and plastic deformation. The presence of fatigue cracks and metal strips/metal flash significantly differed between unused instruments and instruments used four or five times, in all observed sections. The area of instrumented Endo Training Blocks significantly differed in relation to the number of instrument uses. The Reciproc files wore progressively, and repeated use affected their shaping efficiency in simulated canals.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Endodontics and Root Canal Treatments · Dental Radiography and Imaging · Dental materials and restorations
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Endodontics and Restorative Dentistry, University of Siena
Department of Endodontics, School of Dentistry, Lebanese University
Department of Fixed Prosthodontics and Dental Materials, University of Siena
References (36)
Show source-provided references
1. 1. Schilder H (1974) Cleaning and shaping the root canal. Dent Clin North Am18, 269-296.10.1016/S0011-8532(22)00677-2 ↗
2. 2. Peters OA (2004) Current challenges and concepts in the preparation of root canal systems: a review. J Endod 30, 559-567.10.1097/01.DON.0000129039.59003.9D ↗
3. 3. Bartols A, Robra BP, Walther W (2017) The ability of Reciproc instruments to reach the full working length without glide path preparation: a clinical retrospective study. Peer J, doi: 10.7717/peerj.3583.10.7717/peerj.3583 ↗
4. 4. De-Deus G, Arruda TE, Souza EM, Neves A, Magalhães K, Thuanne E et al. (2013) The ability of the Reciproc R25 instrument to reach the full root canal working length without a glide path. Int Endod J 46, 993-998.10.1111/iej.12091 ↗
5. 5. Kim HC, Kwak SW, Cheung GS, Ko DH, Chung SM, Lee W (2012) Cyclic fatigue and torsional resistance of two new nickel-titanium instruments used in reciprocation motion: Reciproc versus WaveOne. J Endod 38, 541-544.10.1016/j.joen.2011.11.014 ↗
6. 6. Pereira ES, Peixoto IF, Viana AC, Oliveira II, Gonzalez BM, Buono VT et al. (2012) Physical and mechanical properties of a thermomechanically treated NiTi wire used in the manufacture of rotary endodontic instruments. Int Endod J 45, 469-474.10.1111/j.1365-2591.2011.01998.x ↗
7. 7. Castelló-Escrivá R, Alegre-Domingo T, Faus-Matoses V, Román-Richon S, Faus-Llácer VJ (2012) In vitro comparison of cyclic fatigue resistance of ProTaper, WaveOne, and Twisted Files. J Endod 38, 1521-1524.10.1016/j.joen.2012.07.010 ↗
8. 8. Pirani C, Ruggeri O, Cirulli PP, Pelliccioni GA, Gandolfi MG, Prati C (2014) Metallurgical analysis and fatigue resistance of WaveOne and ProTaper nickel-titanium instruments. Odontology 102, 211-216.10.1007/s10266-013-0113-6 ↗
9. 9. Alapati SB, Brantley WA, Iijima M, Clark WA, Kovarik L, Buie C (2009) Metallurgical characterization of a new nickel-titanium wire for rotary endodontic instruments. J Endod 35, 1589-1593.10.1016/j.joen.2009.08.004 ↗
10. 10. Scelza P, Harry D, Silva LE, Barbosa IB, Scelza MZ (2015) A comparison of two reciprocating instruments using bending stress and cyclic fatigue tests. Braz Oral Res 29, 1-7.10.1590/1807-3107BOR-2015.vol29.0107 ↗
11. 11. Peters OA, Paque F (2010) Current developments in rotary root canal instrument technology and clinical use: a review. Quintessence Int 41, 479-488.
12. 12. Shen Y, Zhou HM, Zheng YF, Peng B, Haapasalo M (2013) Current challenges and concepts of the thermomechanical treatment of nickel-titanium instruments. J Endod 39, 163-172.10.1016/j.joen.2012.11.005 ↗
13. 13. Luzi A, Forner L, Almenar A, Llena C (2010) Microstructure alterations of rotary files after multiple simulated operative procedures. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 15, e658-662.10.4317/medoral.15.e658 ↗
14. 14. Schrader C, Peters OA (2003) Analysis of torque and force with differently tapered rotary endodontic instruments in vitro. J Endod 31, 120-123.10.1097/01.don.0000137634.20499.1d ↗
15. 15. Yamazaki- Arasaki A, Cabrales R, Santos M, Kleine B, Prokopowitsch I (2012) Topography of four different enddontic rotary systems, before and after being used for the 12th time. Microsc Res Tech 75, 97-102.10.1002/jemt.21021 ↗
16. 16. Sattapan B, Nervo GJ, Palamara JE, Messer HH (2000) Defects in nickel-titanium endodontic rotary files after clinical usage. J Endod 26, 161-165.10.1097/00004770-200003000-00008 ↗
17. 17. Park SK, Kim YJ, Shon WJ, You SY, Moon YM, Kim HC (2014) Clinical efficiency and reusability of the reciprocating nickel-titanium instruments according to the root canal anatomy. Scanning 36, 246-251.10.1002/sca.21096 ↗
18. 18. Caballero H, Rivera F, Salas H (2015) Scanning electron microscopy of superficial defects in twisted files and Reciproc nickel-titanium files after use in extracted molars. IntEndod J 48, 229-235.10.1111/iej.12304 ↗
19. 19. Pirani C, Paolucci A, Ruggeri O, Bossù M, Polimeni A, Gatto MR et al. (2014) Wear and metallographic analysis of WaveOne and reciproc NiTi instruments before and after three uses in root canals. Scanning 36, 517-525.10.1002/sca.21150 ↗
20. 20. Hanan ARA, Meireles DA, Sponchiado Jr EC, Hanan S, Kuga MC, Bonetti-Filho I (2015) Surface characteristics of reciprocating instruments before and after use: a SEM analysis. Braz Dent J 26, 121-127.10.1590/0103-6440201300208 ↗
21. 21. Eggert C, Peters O, Barbakow F (1999) Wear of nickel titanium lightspeed instruments evaluated by scanning electron microscopy. J Endod 25, 494-497.10.1016/S0099-2399(99)80289-1 ↗
22. 22. Ounsi HF, Franciosi G, Al-Hezaimi K, Salameh Z, Tay FR, Ferrari M et al. (2011) Comparison of twotechniques for assessing the shaping efficacy of repeatedly-used NiTi rotary instruments. J Endod 37, 847-850.10.1016/j.joen.2011.02.030 ↗
23. 23. Troian CH, Só MV, Figueiredo JA, Oliveira EP (2006) Deformation and fracture of RaCe and K3 endodontic instruments according to the number of uses. Int Endod J 39, 616-625.10.1111/j.1365-2591.2006.01119.x ↗
24. 24. Yang GB, Zhou XD, Zhang H, Wu HK (2006) Shaping ability of progressive versus constant taper instruments in simulated root canals. Int Endod J 39, 791-799.10.1111/j.1365-2591.2006.01151.x ↗
25. 25. Bergmans L, van Cleynenbreugel J, Wevers M, Lambrechts P (2001) Mechanical root canal preparation with NiTi rotary instruments: rationale, performance and safety-status report for the American Journal of Dentistry. Am J Dent 14, 324-333.
26. 26. Schäfer E, Oitzinger M (2008) Cutting efficiency of five different types of rotary nickeltitanium instruments. J Endod 34, 198-200.10.1016/j.joen.2007.10.009 ↗
27. 27. Ponti TM, McDonald N, Kuttler S, Strassler HE, Dumsha TC (2002) Canal-centering ability of two rotary file systems. J Endod 28, 283-286.10.1097/00004770-200204000-00006 ↗
28. 28. Schafer E, Erler M, Dammaschke T (2006) Comparative study on the shaping ability and cleaning efficiency of rotary Mtwo instruments. Part 1. Shaping ability in simulated curved canals. Int Endod J 39, 196-202.10.1111/j.1365-2591.2006.01074.x ↗
29. 29. Nikhil V, Srivastava N (2009) A new pre-clinical “endodontic model”: boon to learners. Endodontology 21, 58-61.10.4103/0970-7212.351942 ↗
30. 30. Zelada G, Varela P, Martìn B, Bahillo JG, Magàn F, Ahn S (2002) The effect of rotational speed and the curvature of root canals on the breakage of rotary endodontic instruments. J Endod 28, 540-542.10.1097/00004770-200207000-00014 ↗
31. 31. Allen MJ, Glickman GN, Griggs JA (2007) Comparative analysis of endodontic path finders. J Endod 33, 723-726.10.1016/j.joen.2007.02.001 ↗
32. 32. Kottoor J, Velmurugan N, Gopikrishna V, Krithikadatta J (2013) Effects of multiple root canal usage on the surface topography and fracture of two different Ni-Ti rotary file systems. Indian J Dent Res 24, 42-47.10.4103/0970-9290.114942 ↗
33. 33. Arantes WB, da Silva CM, Lage-Marques JL, Habitante S, da Rosa LC, de Medeiros JM (2014) SEM analysis of defects and wear on Ni-Ti rotary instruments. Scanning 36, 411-418.10.1002/sca.21134 ↗
34. 34. Chianello G, Specian VL, Hardt LC, Raldi DP, Lage-Marques JL, Habitante SM (2008) Surface finishing of unused rotary endodontic instruments: a SEM study. Braz Dent J 19, 109-113.10.1590/S0103-64402008000200004 ↗
35. 35. Barnett ML, Mathisen A (1997) Tyranny of the p-value: the conflict between statistical significance and common sense (editorial). J Dent Res 76, 534-536.10.1177/00220345970760010201 ↗
36. 36. Bahia MGA, Buono VTL (2005) Decrease in the fatigue resistance of nickel-titanium rotary instruments after clinical use in curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod100, 249-255.