RESUMO
The resistance of nickel-titanium endodontic instruments against cyclic fatigue failure remains a significant concern in clinical settings. This study aimed to assess the cyclic fatigue strength of five nickel-titanium rotary systems, while correlating the results with the instruments' geometric and metallurgical characteristics. A total of 250 new instruments (sizes S1/A1, S2/A2, F1/B1, F2/B2, F3/B3) from ProTaper Gold, ProTaper Universal, Premium Taper Gold, Go-Taper Flex, and U-Files systems underwent mechanical testing. Prior to experimental procedures, all instruments were meticulously inspected to identify irregularities that could affect the investigation. Using a stereomicroscope, design characteristics such as the number of spirals, length, spirals per millimeter, and average helical angle of the active blade were determined. The surface finishing characteristics of the instruments were examined using a scanning electron microscope. Differential scanning calorimetry was employed to establish the instruments' phase transformation temperatures, while energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy was utilized to analyze the elemental composition of the alloy. The instruments were subjected to cyclic fatigue testing within a stainless steel non-tapered artificial canal featuring a 6 mm radius and 86 degrees of curvature. Appropriate statistical tests were applied to compare groups, considering a significance level of 0.05. The assessed design characteristics varied depending on the instrument type. The least irregular surface finishing was observed in U-Files and Premium Taper Gold files, while the most irregular surface was noted in Go-Taper Flex. All instruments exhibited near-equiatomic proportions of nickel and titanium elements, whereas ProTaper Universal and U-Files instruments demonstrated lower phase transformation temperatures compared to their counterparts. Larger-sized instruments, as well as ProTaper Universal and U-Files, tended to display lower cyclic fatigue strength results. Overall, the design, metallurgical, and cyclic fatigue outcomes varied among instruments and systems. Understanding these outcomes may assist clinicians in making more informed decisions regarding instrument selection.
RESUMO
This study aimed to compare three endodontic rotary systems. The new Genius Proflex (25/0.04), Vortex Blue (25/0.04), and TruNatomy (26/0.04v) instruments (n = 41 per group) were analyzed regarding design, metallurgy, and mechanical performance, while shaping ability (untouched canal walls, volume of removed dentin and hard tissue debris) was tested in 36 anatomically matched root canals of mandibular molars. The results were compared using one-way ANOVA, post hoc Tukey, and Kruskal−Wallis tests, with a significance level set at 5%. All instruments showed symmetrical cross-sections, with asymmetrical blades, no radial lands, no major defects, and almost equiatomic nickel−titanium ratios. Differences were noted in the number of blades, helical angles, cross-sectional design, and tip geometry. The Genius Proflex and the TruNatomy instruments had the highest and lowest R-phase start and finish temperatures, as well as the highest and lowest time and cycles to fracture (p < 0.05), respectively. The TruNatomy had the highest flexibility (p < 0.05), while no differences were observed between the Genius Proflex and the Vortex Blue (p > 0.05). No differences among tested systems were observed regarding the maximum torque, angle of rotation prior to fracture, and shaping ability (p > 0.05). The instruments showed similarities and differences in their design, metallurgy, and mechanical properties. However, their shaping ability was similar, without any clinically significant errors. Understanding these characteristics may help clinicians to make decisions regarding which instrument to choose for a particular clinical situation.
RESUMO
A multimethod study was conducted to assess the differences between original (PG-OR) and counterfeit (PG-CF) ProGlider instruments regarding design, metallurgical features, and mechanical performance. Seventy PG-OR and PG-CF instruments (n = 35 per group) were evaluated regarding the number of spirals, helical angles, and measuring line position by stereomicroscopy, while blade symmetry, cross-section geometry, tip design, and surface were assessed by scanning electron microscopy. Energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy and differential scanning calorimetry were used to identify element ratio and phase transformation temperatures, while cyclic fatigue, torsional, and bending testing were employed to assess their mechanical performance. An unpaired t-test and nonparametric Mann−Whitney U test were used to compare instruments at a significance level of 5%. Similarities were observed in the number of spirals, helical angles, blade symmetry, cross-sectional geometries, and nickel−titanium ratios. Measuring lines were more reliable in the original instrument, while differences were noted in the geometry of the tips (sharper tip for the original and rounded for the counterfeit) and surface finishing with PG-CF presenting more surface irregularities. PG-OR showed significantly more time to fracture (118 s), a higher angle of rotation (440°), and a lower maximum bending load (146.3 gf) (p < 0.05) than PG-CF (p < 0.05); however, maximum torque was similar for both instruments (0.4 N.cm) (p > 0.05). Although the tested instruments had a similar design, the original ProGlider showed superior mechanical behavior. The results of counterfeit ProGlider instruments were unreliable and can be considered unsafe for glide path procedures.