Cyclic fatigue resistance: comparison of AF F-One and One Curve rotary instruments with Hyflex EDM OneFile in root canal therapy
Background and Objectives: Cyclic fatigue is a major reason for file fractures as a complicated challenge in root canal therapy. The advantages of single-file rotary systems include time saving, cost-effectivenes and low risks of instrument fractures. This study selected an optimal file in terms of cost and clinical function by comparing cyclic fatigue among three files.
Materials and Methods: This in-vitro study employed artificial steel canal. Fifteen files of One-Curve, One-File and F-One were rotated according to their manufacturer's recommendation for speed and torque until they fractured. The number of cycles until fracture and the length of the fractured part were measured. The data obtaind were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn's tests with a statistically-significant threshold of P<0.05.
Results: The mean fracture time of One-File was 456±14 seconds. The mean number of rotations was 3043±937 for One-File, 1333±234 for One-Curve and 462±116 for F-One, suggesting statistically-signficant diffrences (P<0.001). The mean length of the fractured part was 8.32±0.64 mm in One-File, 5.17±0.917 mm in One-Curve and 6.58±1.16 mm in F-One, suggesting statistically-signficant diffrences (P<0.001).
Conclusion: Resistance to cyclic fatigue in inside curved canals was the highest in One-File, followed by One-Curve and F-One, which cannot be used as an appropriate alternative to the other two types of file in single-file systems.
2. Nabavizadeh MR, Sedigh-Shams M, Abdolrasoulnia S. Cyclic Fatigue Life of Two Single File Engine-Driven Systems in Simulated Curved Canals. Iranian endodontic journal. 2018;13(1):61.
3. Testarelli L, Grande N, Plotino G, Lendini M, Pongione G, De Paolis G, et al. Cyclic fatigue of different nickel-titanium rotary instruments: a comparative study. Open Dent J. 16;3:55-8.
4. Capar ID, Ertas H, Ok E, Arslan H, Ertas ET. Comparative study of different novel nickel-titanium rotary systems for root canal preparation in severely curved root canals. J Endod. 2014;40(6):852-6.
5. Gutmann J, Gao Y. Alteration in the inherent metallic and surface properties of nickel–titanium root canal instruments to enhance performance, durability and safety: a focused review. Int Endod J. 2012;45(2):113-28.
6. Serafin M, De Biasi M, Franco V, Angerame D. In vitro comparison of cyclic fatigue resistance of two rotary single-file endodontic systems: OneCurve versus OneShape. Odontology. 2019;107(2):196-201.
7. Azim AA, Tarrosh M, Azim KA, Piasecki L. Comparison between single-file rotary systems: part 2—the effect of length of the instrument subjected to cyclic loading on cyclic fatigue resistance. J Endod. 2018;44(12):1837-42.
8. Kaddoura R, Madarati AA, Al Tayyan M. Shaping ability of different single-file rotary systems in simulated S-shaped canals by a new investigation approach: An in vitro study. Saudi Endod J 2021;11:173-80
9. Di Nardo D, Miccoli G, Mazzoni A, et al. Centering Ability of a New Nickel–Titanium Rotary Instruments with a Peculiar Flat-side Design: An In Vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2020;21(5):539–542.
10. Kataia, E.M., Nagy, M.M., Kataia, M.M. et al. Shaping ability of two heat treated rotary NiTi instruments using different kinematics/in vitro study. Bull Natl Res Cent 45, 42 (2021).
11. Kataia, E.M., Nagy, M.M., Kataia, M.M. et al. Cutting efficiency of two heat-treated files in rotation and reciprocation motions. Bull Natl Res Cent 45, 120 (2021).
12. Gambarini G, Miccoli G, Seracchiani M, Khrenova T, Donfrancesco O, D’Angelo M, et al. Role of the flat-designed surface in improving the cyclic fatigue resistance of endodontic niTi rotary instruments. Materials. 2019;12(16):2523.
13. Castelló-Escrivá R, Alegre-Domingo T, Faus-Matoses V, Román-Richon S, Faus-Llácer VJ. In vitro comparison of cyclic fatigue resistance of ProTaper, WaveOne, and Twisted Files. J Endod. 2012;38(11):1521-4.
14. Haikel Y, Serfaty R, Bateman G, Senger B, Allemann C. Dynamic and cyclic fatigue of engine-driven rotary nickel-titanium endodontic instruments. J Endod. 1999;25(6):434-40.
15. Parashos P, Gordon I, Messer HH. Factors influencing defects of rotary nickel-titanium endodontic instruments after clinical use. J Endod. 2004;30(10):722-5.
16. Plotino G, Grande N, Testarelli L, Gambarini G. Cyclic fatigue of Reciproc and WaveOne reciprocating instruments. Int Endod J. 2012;45(7):614-8.
17. Pedullà E, Grande N, Plotino G, Palermo F, Gambarini G, Rapisarda E. Cyclic fatigue resistance of two reciprocating nickel–titanium instruments after immersion in sodium hypochlorite. Int Endod J. 2013;46(2):155-9.
18. Balani P, Niazi F, Rashid H. A brief review of the methods used to determine the curvature of root canals. J Restor Dent. 2015;3(3):57.
19. Uygun A, Unal M, Falakaloglu S, Guven Y. Comparison of the cyclic fatigue resistance of hyflex EDM, vortex blue, protaper gold, and onecurve nickel–Titanium instruments. Niger J Clin Pract. 2020;23(1):41.
20. Lopes HP, Vieira MV, Elias CN, Gonçalves LS, Siqueira Jr JF, Moreira EJ, et al. Influence of the geometry of curved artificial canals on the fracture of rotary nickel-titanium instruments subjected to cyclic fatigue tests. J Endod. 2013;39(5):704-7.
21. Aminsobhani M, Meraji N, Sadri E. Comparison of cyclic fatigue resistance of five nickel titanium rotary file systems with different manufacturing techniques. J Dent (Tehran). 2015;12(9):636.
22. Kaval ME, Capar ID, Ertas H. Evaluation of the cyclic fatigue and torsional resistance of novel nickel-titanium rotary files with various alloy properties. J Endod. 2016;42(12):1840-3.
23. Shen Y, Hieawy A, Huang X, Wang Z-j, Maezono H, Haapasalo M. Fatigue resistance of a 3-dimensional conforming nickel-titanium rotary instrument in double curvatures. J Endod. 2016;42(6):961-4.
24. Elnaghy A, Elsaka S. Laboratory comparison of the mechanical properties of TRUS hape with several nickel‐titanium rotary instruments. Int Endod J. 2017;50(8):805-12.
25. Plotino G, Grande NM, Cordaro M, Testarelli L, Gambarini G. A review of cyclic fatigue testing of nickel-titanium rotary instruments. J Endod. 2009;35(11):1469-76.
26. De‐Deus G, Moreira E, Lopes H, Elias C. Extended cyclic fatigue life of F2 ProTaper instruments used in reciprocating movement. Int Endod J. 2010;43(12):1063-8.
27. Varela-Patiño P, Ibañez-Párraga A, Rivas-Mundiña B, Cantatore G, Otero XL, Martin-Biedma B. Alternating versus continuous rotation: a comparative study of the effect on instrument life. J Endod. 2010;36(1):157-9.
28. Karataş E, Arslan H, Büker M, Seçkin F, Çapar I. Effect of movement kinematics on the cyclic fatigue resistance of nickel–titanium instruments. Int Endod J. 2016;49(4):361-4.
29. Webber J. Shaping canals with confidence: WaveOne GOLD single-file reciprocating system. Int Dent Afr Ed. 2016;6(3):6–17.
30. Zelada G, Varela P, Martín B, Bahíllo JG, Magán F, Ahn S. The effect of rotational speed and the curvature of root canals on the breakage of rotary endodontic instruments. J Endod. 2002;28(7):540-2.
31. Pedullà E, Plotino G, Grande N, Scibilia M, Pappalardo A, Malagnino V, et al. Influence of rotational speed on the cyclic fatigue of M two instruments. Int Endod J. 2014;47(6):514-9.
32. Lopes HP, Ferreira AA, Elias CN, Moreira EJ, de Oliveira JCM, Siqueira Jr JF. Influence of rotational speed on the cyclic fatigue of rotary nickel-titanium endodontic instruments. J Endod. 2009;35(7):1013-6.
33. Viana ACD, de Melo MCC, de Azevedo Bahia MG, Buono VTL. Relationship between flexibility and physical, chemical, and geometric characteristics of rotary nickel-titanium instruments. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2010;110(4):527-33.
34. Grande N, Plotino G, Pecci R, Bedini R, Malagnino V, Somma F. Cyclic fatigue resistance and three‐dimensional analysis of instruments from two nickel–titanium rotary systems. Int Endod J. 2006;39(10):755-63.
Copyright (c) 2022 Advances in Applied NanoBio-Technologies
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.