Comparative study of torsional and bending properties for six models of nickel-titanium root canal instruments with different cross-sections.

This study investigated the influence of cross-section profile on the mechanical behaviors of six commercial nickel-titanium (NiTi) root canal instruments using the finite element method. The nonlinear mechanical characteristics of the NiTi alloy were taken into account. The six root canal instruments studied were ProTaper, Hero642, Mtwo, ProFile, Quantec, and NiTiflex. Mathematical models for these instruments were constructed and their performances were analyzed under equal torque conditions. The ProTaper and Hero642 models achieved the lowest stress levels that made them the most torque-resistant while the NiTiflex model was the poorest. The maximum stress value and the stress distribution in a model were found strongly influenced by the cross-section profile. Factors affecting the stress distribution include the cross-sectional inertia, depth of the flute, area of the inner core, radial land, and peripheral surface ground. As the area of the inner core of the cross-section increased, the model was more torque-resistant.

[1]  P M Dummer,et al.  A comparison of stainless steel Flexofiles and nickel-titanium NiTiFlex files during the shaping of simulated canals. , 1997, International endodontic journal.

[2]  P. Eleazer,et al.  A comparison of torque required to fracture rotary files with tips bound in simulated curved canal. , 2005, Journal of endodontics.

[3]  W J Pertot,et al.  Relationship between file size and stiffness of nickel titanium instruments. , 1995, Endodontics & dental traumatology.

[4]  H. Gerstein,et al.  An initial investigation of the bending and torsional properties of Nitinol root canal files. , 1988, Journal of endodontics.

[5]  P. Esposito,et al.  A comparison of canal preparation with nickel-titanium and stainless steel instruments. , 1995, Journal of endodontics.

[6]  Gary R Hartwell,et al.  K3 Endo, ProTaper, and ProFile systems: breakage and distortion in severely curved roots of molars. , 2004, Journal of endodontics.

[7]  V T Himel,et al.  An evaluation of nitinol and stainless steel files used by dental students during a laboratory proficiency exam. , 1995, Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics.

[8]  Ove A Peters,et al.  Analysis of torque and force with differently tapered rotary endodontic instruments in vitro. , 2005, Journal of Endodontics.

[9]  B. Sattapan,et al.  Defects in rotary nickel-titanium files after clinical use. , 2000, Journal of endodontics.

[10]  G. Chiandussi,et al.  Comparative analysis of torsional and bending stresses in two mathematical models of nickel-titanium rotary instruments: ProTaper versus ProFile. , 2003, Journal of endodontics.

[11]  O. Peters,et al.  Effect of cyclic fatigue on static fracture loads in ProTaper nickel-titanium rotary instruments. , 2005, Journal of endodontics.

[12]  J. Camps,et al.  Machining efficiency of nickel-titanium K-type files in a linear motion. , 1995, International endodontic journal.

[13]  H H Messer,et al.  Torque during canal instrumentation using rotary nickel-titanium files. , 2000, Journal of endodontics.

[14]  S A Thompson,et al.  Shaping ability of Profile rotary nickel-titanium instruments with ISO sized tips in simulated root canals: Part 1. , 2002, International endodontic journal.

[15]  F. Chagneau,et al.  Impact of two theoretical cross-sections on torsional and bending stresses of nickel-titanium root canal instrument models. , 2000, Journal of endodontics.

[16]  S B Dove,et al.  A comparison of root canal preparations using Ni-Ti hand, Ni-Ti engine-driven, and K-Flex endodontic instruments. , 1995, Journal of endodontics.

[17]  G Gambarini,et al.  Rationale for the use of low-torque endodontic motors in root canal instrumentation. , 2000, Endodontics & dental traumatology.