Advanced search
Start date
Betweenand
(Reference retrieved automatically from Web of Science through information on FAPESP grant and its corresponding number as mentioned in the publication by the authors.)

Cyclic and Torsional Fatigue Resistance of Reciprocating Single Files Manufactured by Different Nickel-titanium Alloys

Full text
Author(s):
Alcalde, Murilo P. ; Tanomaru-Filho, Mario ; Bramante, Clovis M. ; Duarte, Marco Antonio H. ; Guerreiro-Tanomaru, Juliane Maria ; Camilo-Pinto, Jader ; Reis So, Marcus Vinicius ; Vivan, Rodrigo Ricci
Total Authors: 8
Document type: Journal article
Source: JOURNAL OF ENDODONTICS; v. 43, n. 7, p. 1186-1191, JUL 2017.
Web of Science Citations: 13
Abstract

Introduction: The aim of this study was to evaluate the cyclic and torsional fatigue resistance of the following reciprocating single-file systems: ProDesign R 25.06 (Easy Equipamentos Odontologicos, Belo Horizonte, Brazil), Reciproc R25 (VDW GmbH, Munich, Germany), and Unicone L25 (Medin SA, Nove Mesto in Morave, Czech Republic). Methods: Sixty instruments of the Pro Design R, Reciproc R25, and Unicone L25 systems (n = 20) were used. Cyclic fatigue resistance was tested measuring the time to failure in an artificial stainless steel canal with a 60 angle and a 5-mm radius of curvature (n = 10). Torque and angle of rotation at failure of new instruments (n = 10) in the 3 mm from the tip portion were measured during torsional testing according to ISO 3630-1. The fractured surface of each fragment was examined by scanning electron microscopy. Data were analyzed using 1-way analysis of variance and Tukey tests, and the level of significance was set at 5%. Results: The cyclic fatigue resistance values of ProDesign.R 25.06 were significantly higher than the other groups (P < .05). Reciproc R25 showed higher fatigue resistance than Unicone L25 (P < .05). In relation to the torsional test, the ProDesign R 25.06 and Unicone L25 systems showed higher angular rotation until fracture than Reciproc R25 (P <.05). However, Reciproc R25 and Unicone L25 showed higher torque load than ProDesign R 25.06 (P <.05). Scanning electron microscopic analysis showed similar and typical features of cyclic and torsional failure for all instruments tested. Conclusions: ProDesign R presented the highest cyclic fatigue resistance and angular rotation to failure compared with Reciproc and Unicone. However, Reciproc showed higher torsional strength to failure. (AU)

FAPESP's process: 14/25520-0 - Evaluation of chemical properties, torsional and flexural resistance, geometric and superficial characterization of endodontic instruments depending on the alloy treatment: analysis after 3 times simulating clinical use
Grantee:Rodrigo Ricci Vivan
Support Opportunities: Regular Research Grants