A comparative study of cyclic fatigue of 6 endodontic systems. An in vitro study

• Jorge Rubio ^[1] ; José-Ignacio Zarzosa ^[1] ; Susana Aranda ^[1] ; Alberto Casino ^[1] ; Antonio Pallarés ^[2]
  1. [1] Professors of the Master of Endodontics and Restorative Dentistry, Catholic University of Valencia
  2. [2] Director of the Master of Endodontics and Restorative Dentistry, Catholic University of Valencia
• Localización: Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry, ISSN-e 1989-5488, Vol. 14, Nº. 7 (July), 2022, págs. 560-565
• Idioma: inglés
• Enlaces
  • Texto completo
• Resumen

  • Mechanical preparation and the formation of space for adequate obturation are included in root canal shaping, but the complex root canal anatomy may be affect it. Manufacturers have created different alloys like M-Wire, Blue-Wire, Gold-Wire or R-phase. Objective: This investigation was performed to verify the null hypothesis that there were not significant differences between size 25 instruments ESP Files Thermoflex, Protaper Ultimate, Protaper Next, Blueshaper, One Curve and 2Shape about cyclic fatigue and length of broken fragments.

    180 new size 25 files of the systems investigated were selected (n=30). Files were used with Endo Mate DT endo motor with speed and torque recommended by manufacturers, holding the instruments with clamping mechanism, with passive adjustment, glycerine and without pressure in a stainless-steel block. The time was calculated in seconds until fracture. Number of fatigue cycles was determined as (Resistance (s) x Speed)/60. Separated fragment lengths were calculated with digital Vernier caliper. Statistical analysis was carried out with the SPSS 18 programme at a 95% confidence level, using Levene´s Test to compare variances, Welch’s Test to compare means, and Games-Howell´s Test to reveal differences between groups.

    Levene’s Test determined no equal variances (P<0.05). Welch’s Test and ANOVA (P<0.05) showed significant differences in cyclic fatigue and separated fragment lengths. Games-Howell’s and Bonferroni´s Test established significant differences in multiple comparisons (P<0.05).

    ESP Files Thermoflex was superior in cyclic fatigue. About separated fragment lengths, ESP Files Thermoflex, Protaper Ultimate and Blueshaper obtained longer lengths.