Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics

The Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry (대한치과보존학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A comparison of dimensional standard of several nickel-titanium rotary files

  • Kim, Ki-Won (Department of Conservative Dentistry, Gangneung-Wonju National University College of Dentistry) ;
  • Cho, Kyung-Mo (Department of Conservative Dentistry, Gangneung-Wonju National University College of Dentistry) ;
  • Park, Se-Hee (Department of Conservative Dentistry, Gangneung-Wonju National University College of Dentistry) ;
  • Choi, Ki-Yeol (Department of Dental Biomaterials, Gangneung-Wonju National University College of Dentistry) ;
  • Karabucak, Bekir (Department of Endodontics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia School of Dental Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Jin-Woo (Department of Conservative Dentistry, Gangneung-Wonju National University College of Dentistry)
  • Received : 2013.08.31
  • Accepted : 2013.11.06
  • Published : 2014.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the dimensional standard of several nickel-titanium (Ni-Ti) rotary files and verify the size conformity. Materials and Methods: ProFile (Dentsply Maillefer), RaCe (FKG Dentaire), and TF file (SybronEndo) #25 with a 0.04 and 0.06 taper were investigated, with 10 in each group for a total of 60 files. Digital images of Ni-Ti files were captured under light microscope (SZX16, Olympus) at $32{\times}$. Taper and diameter at $D_1$ to $D_{16}$ of each files were calculated digitally with AnalySIS TS Materials (OLYMPUS Soft Imaging Solutions). Differences in taper, the diameter of each level ($D_1$ to $D_{16}$) at 1 mm interval from (ANSI/ADA) specification No. 101 were statistically analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Scheffe's post-hoc test at 95% confidence level. Results: TF was the only group not conform to the nominal taper in both tapers (p < 0.05). All groups except 0.06 taper ProFile showed significant difference from the nominal diameter (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Actual size of Ni-Ti file, especially TF, was different from the manufacturer's statements.

Keywords

References

  1. Yoon MJ, Song MJ, Shin SJ, Kim E. Comparison of apical transportation and change of working length in K3, NRT and ProFile rotary instruments using transparent resin block. J Korean Acad Conserv Dent 2011;36:59-65. https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2011.36.1.59
  2. Ruddle CJ. Nickel-titanium rotary instruments: current concepts for preparing the root canal system. Aust Endod J 2003;29:87-98. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-4477.2003.tb00521.x
  3. Ingle JI. The need for endodontic instrument standardization. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1955;8: 1211-1213. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-4220(55)90385-6
  4. Grossman LI. Transactions of the second international conference on endodontics. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press; 1958. Ingle JI, Levine M. The need for uniformity of endodontic instruments, equipment and filling materials. 234:123-142.
  5. Stenman E, Spangberg LS. Root canal instruments are poorly standardized. J Endod 1993;19:327-334. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-2399(06)81358-0
  6. Ingle JI. A standardized endodontic technique utilizing newly designed instruments and filling materials. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1961;14:83-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-4220(61)90477-7
  7. Heuer M. The biomechanics of endodontic therapy. Dent Clin North Am 1963;13:341-359.
  8. American Dental Association Council on Dental Materials, Instruments, and Equipment. Revised ANSI/ ADA specification no. 28: root canal files and reamers, type K. 1981.
  9. American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs. ANSI/ADA specification no. 28: root canal files and reamers, type K. 2008.
  10. ISO-Standards ISO 3630 Dentistry-Root canal instruments -Part 1: General requirements and test methods. Geneve: International Organization for Standardization; 2008. p1-18.
  11. American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs. ANSI/ADA specification no. 101: root canal instruments-general requirements. 2001.
  12. Zinelis S, Magnissalis EA, Margelos J, Lambrianidis T. Clinical relevance of standardization of endodontic files dimensions according to the ISO 3630-1 specification. J Endod 2002;28:367-370. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004770-200205000-00005
  13. Keate KC, Wong M. Comparison of endodontic file tip quality. J Endod 1990;16:486-491. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-2399(07)80178-6
  14. Cormier CJ, von Fraunhofer JA, Chamberlain JH. A comparison of endodontic file quality and file dimensions. J Endod 1988;14:138-142. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-2399(88)80215-2
  15. Dearing GJ, Kazemi RB, Stevens RH. An objective evaluation comparing the physical properties of two brands of stainless steel endodontic hand files. J Endod 2005;31:827-830. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.don.0000158236.10177.74
  16. Schäfer E, Dzepina A, Danesh G. Bending properties of rotary nickel-titanium instruments. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2003;96:757-763. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1079-2104(03)00358-5
  17. Lask JT, Walker MP, Kulild JC, Cunningham KP, Shull PA. Variability of the diameter and taper of size #30, 0.04 nickel-titanium rotary files. J Endod 2006;32:1171-1173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2006.07.013
  18. Hatch GW, Roberts S, Joyce AP, Runner R, McPherson JC 3rd. Comparative study of the variability of 0.06 tapered rotary endodontic files to current taper standards. J Endod 2008;34:463-465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2008.01.003
  19. Gambarini G, Grande NM, Plotino G, Somma F, Garala M, De Luca M, Testarelli L. Fatigue resistance of enginedriven rotary nickel-titanium instruments produced by new manufacturing methods. J Endod 2008;34:1003-1005. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2008.05.007
  20. El Batouty KM, Elmallah WE. Comparison of canal transportation and changes in canal curvature of two nickel-titanium rotary instruments. J Endod 2011;37: 1290-1292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2011.05.024
  21. Gambarini G, Gerosa R, De Luca M, Garala M, Testarelli L. Mechanical properties of a new and improved nickeltitanium alloy for endodontic use: an evaluation of file flexibility. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2008;105:798-800. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tripleo.2008.02.017
  22. Oh SR, Chang SW, Lee Y, Gu Y, Son WJ, Lee W, Baek SH, Bae KS, Choi GW, Lim SM, Kum KY. A comparison of nickel-titanium rotary instruments manufactured using different methods and cross-sectional areas: ability to resist cyclic fatigue. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2010;109:622-628. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tripleo.2009.12.025
  23. Kim HC, Yum J, Hur B, Cheung GS. Cyclic fatigue and fracture characteristics of ground and twisted nickeltitanium rotary files. J Endod 2010;36:147-152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2009.09.037
  24. Hou X, Yahata Y, Hayashi Y, Ebihara A, Hanawa T, Suda H. Phase transformation behaviour and bending property of twisted nickel-titanium endodontic instruments. Int Endod J 2011;44:253-258. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2010.01818.x
  25. Camps JJ, Pertot WJ. Relationship between file size and stiffness of stainless steel instruments. Endod Dent Traumatol 1994;10:260-263. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-9657.1994.tb00081.x
  26. Camps JJ, Pertot WJ, Levallois B. Relationship between file size and stiffness of nickel-titanium instruments. Endod Dent Traumatol 1995;11:270-273. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-9657.1995.tb00502.x
  27. Schäfer E, Tepel J. Relationship between design features of endodontic instruments and their properties. Part 3. Resistance to bending and fracture. J Endod 2001;27:299-303. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004770-200104000-00018
  28. Turpin YL, Chagneau F, Vulcain JM. Impact of two theoretical cross-sections on torsional and bending stresses of nickel-titanium root canal instrument models. J Endod 2000;26:414-417. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004770-200007000-00009
  29. Kim BH, Choi KK, Park SH, Choi GW. A comparison of the shaping ability of four rotary nickel-titanium files in simulated root canals. J Korean Acad Conserv Dent 2010;35:88-95. https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2010.35.2.088

Cited by

  1. Diameter and Taper Variability of Single-file Instrumentation Systems and Their Corresponding Gutta-percha Cones vol.44, pp.9, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2018.06.005