Relationship between design features of endodontic instruments and their properties. Part 3. Resistance to bending and fracture.

Stainless-steel prototypes characterized by five different cross-sectional shapes (square, triangular, rhomboidal, "S"-shaped, and the cross-sectional design of H-type files) and three different number of flutes (16, 24, and 32) were used for investigation of the relationship between design features and the resistance to bending and fracture of root canal instruments. Both resistance to bending (bending moment) and resistance to fracture (angular deflection and torque) were determined in accordance to ISO 3630-1. Numbers 15, 25, and 35 prototypes were tested with a sample size of 10 instruments each. Whereas prototypes with the rhombus-shaped cross-sectional design displayed the lowest resistance to bending, those of the square cross-section showed the greatest. In general, S-shaped prototypes and those with the H-type cross-section achieved lower angular deflection than all other prototypes, whereas those with the triangular cross-sectional shape and 32 flutes reached the greatest angular deflection. Overall, rhombus-shaped prototypes showed lower torque values than all other prototypes. Results indicate that bending and torsional properties of endodontic instruments are mainly influenced by their cross-sectional design. Moreover, these properties are also affected by the number of flutes and the manufacturing process (twisted or milled) of endodontic instruments.

[1]  Stephen Cohen,et al.  Pathways of the Pulp , 1976 .

[2]  R. Craig,et al.  Bending and torsion of endodontic files with rhombus cross sections. , 1982, Journal of endodontics.

[3]  E. Schäfer.  Relationship between design features of endodontic instruments and their properties. Part 2. Instrumentation of curved canals , 1999 .

[4]  Paul Michael Howell Dummer,et al.  Comparison of six files to prepare simulated root canals. Part 1 , 1992 .

[5]  W J Pertot,et al.  Torsional and stiffness properties of nickel-titanium K files. , 1995, International endodontic journal.

[6]  Equipment,et al.  Revised American National Standards Institute/American Dental Association specification no. 28 for root canal files and reamers, type K. Council on Dental Materials, Instruments, and Equipment. , 1982, Journal of the American Dental Association.

[7]  P. Gasser,et al.  Dynamic fracture of hybrid endodontic hand instruments compared with traditional files. , 1991, Journal of endodontics.

[8]  E Schäfer,et al.  Endodontic hand instruments: cutting efficiency, instrumentation of curved canals, bending and torsional properties. , 1997, Endodontics & dental traumatology.

[9]  H. Gerstein,et al.  An investigation of the torsional and bending properties of seven brands of endodontic files. , 1984, Journal of Endodontics.

[10]  R. Gough,et al.  A comparison of the potential for breakage: the Burns Unifile versus Hedstrom files. , 1985, Journal of endodontics.

[11]  J. V. von Fraunhofer,et al.  The effects of various sterilization methods on the torsional strength of endodontic files. , 1985, Journal of endodontics.

[12]  E Schäfer,et al.  Root canal instruments for manual use: a review. , 1997, Endodontics & dental traumatology.

[13]  Edgar Schäfer,et al.  Relationship between design features of endodontic instruments and their properties. Part 1. Cutting efficiency , 1999 .

[14]  E. Schäfer,et al.  Properties of endodontic hand instruments used in rotary motion. Part 3. Resistance to bending and fracture. , 1997, Journal of endodontics.