Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Multimethod analysis of large- and low-tapered single file reciprocating instruments: Design, metallurgy, mechanical performance, and irrigation flow.
Silva, Emmanuel João Nogueira Leal; Peña-Bengoa, Fernando; Ajuz, Natasha C; Vieira, Victor T L; Martins, Jorge N R; Marques, Duarte; Pinto, Ricardo; Rito Pereira, Mario; Braz-Fernandes, Francisco Manuel; Versiani, Marco A.
Afiliação
  • Silva EJNL; Department of Endodontics, School of Dentistry, State University of Rio de Janeiro (UERJ), Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.
  • Peña-Bengoa F; Department of Endodontics, School of Dentistry, Grande Rio University (UNIGRANRIO), Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.
  • Ajuz NC; Department of Endodontics, School of Dentistry, Universidad Andres Bello, Viña del Mar, Chile.
  • Vieira VTL; Department of Endodontics, School of Dentistry, Grande Rio University (UNIGRANRIO), Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.
  • Martins JNR; Department of Endodontics, School of Dentistry, Grande Rio University (UNIGRANRIO), Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.
  • Marques D; Faculdade de Medicina Dentária, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal.
  • Pinto R; Grupo de Investigação em Bioquimica e Biologia Oral, Unidade de Investigação em Ciências Orais e Biomédicas (UICOB), Faculdade de Medicina Dentária, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal.
  • Rito Pereira M; Centro de Estudo de Medicina Dentária Baseada na Evidência (CEMDBE) - Cochrane Portugal, Faculdade de Medicina Dentária, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal.
  • Braz-Fernandes FM; Faculdade de Medicina Dentária, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal.
  • Versiani MA; Grupo de Investigação em Bioquimica e Biologia Oral, Unidade de Investigação em Ciências Orais e Biomédicas (UICOB), Faculdade de Medicina Dentária, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal.
Int Endod J ; 57(5): 601-616, 2024 May.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38376108
ABSTRACT

AIM:

To compare eight large- and low-tapered heat-treated reciprocating instruments regarding their design, metallurgy, mechanical properties, and irrigation flow through an in silico model.

METHODOLOGY:

A total of 472 new 25-mm E-Flex Rex (25/.04 and 25/.06), Excalibur (25/.05), Procodile (25/.06), Reciproc Blue R25 (25/.08v), WaveOne Gold Primary (25/.07v), and Univy Sense (25/.04 and 25/.06) instruments were evaluated regarding their design (stereomicroscopy, scanning electron microscopy, and 3D surface scanning), metallurgy (energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy and differential scanning calorimetry), and mechanical performance (cyclic fatigue, torsional resistance, cutting ability, bending and buckling resistance). Computational fluid dynamics assessment was also conducted to determine the irrigation flow pattern, apical pressure, and wall shear stress in simulated canal preparations. Kruskal-Wallis and one-way anova post hoc Tukey tests were used for statistical comparisons (α = 5%).

RESULTS:

Instruments presented variations in blade numbers, helical angles, and tip designs, with all featuring non-active tips, symmetrical blades, and equiatomic nickel-titanium ratios. Cross-sectional designs exhibited an S-shaped geometry, except for WaveOne Gold. Univy 25/.04 and Reciproc Blue displayed the smallest and largest core diameters at D3. Univy 25/.04 and E-Flex Rec 25/.04 demonstrated the longest time to fracture (p < .05). Reciproc Blue and Univy 25/.04 exhibited the highest and lowest torque to fracture, respectively (p < .05). Univy 25/.04 and Reciproc Blue had the highest rotation angles, whilst E-Flex Rec 25/.06 showed the lowest angle (p < .05). The better cutting ability was observed with E-Flex Rec 25/.06, Procodile, Excalibur, and Reciproc Blue (p > .05). Reciproc R25 and E-Flex Rec showed the highest buckling resistance values (p < .05), with WaveOne Gold being the least flexible instrument. The impact of instruments' size and taper on wall shear stress and apical pressure did not follow a distinct pattern, although Univy 25/.04 and E-Flex Rec 25/.06 yielded the highest and lowest values for both parameters, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS:

Low-tapered reciprocating instruments exhibit increased flexibility, higher time to fracture, and greater angles of rotation, coupled with reduced maximum bending loads and buckling strength compared to large-tapered instruments. Nevertheless, low-tapered systems also exhibit lower maximum torque to fracture and inferior cutting ability, contributing to a narrower apical canal enlargement that may compromise the penetration of irrigants in that region.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Titânio / Instrumentos Odontológicos Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Titânio / Instrumentos Odontológicos Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article